Breeding - Aesthetics and Mismarks.

A subject I am reading/talking about on another forum.

I find the whole thing rather ridiculous.

People claim to breed to better the breed. Yes?

I have major major issues with this statement. How is breeding a dog thats markings match exactly to some written standard bettering ANYTHING about a given breed?

The gene pool is TINY enough for all these pedigree dogs - never mind making it SMALLER because foo foo has a black spot out of place, or is brown and not yellow. Or maybe, it's spots are too close together.

Bettering the breed should be just that - making it better. Healthier. IMPROVING and INCREASING the gene pool. Breeding to ensure that the dog can do what it was ORIGINALLY bred for, and is healthy from genetic diseases (etc).

Conformation - is the way the dog is built (correct me if I am wrong), and obviously what makes the dog LOOK like the dog it is. And has nothing to do with coat.

People do not breed "pet quality" dogs. OFTEN "pet quality" means - mismarked.

It is the most illogical thing I have ever come across.

Of course SOME coat colours are linked to genetic defects (white etc) - I am NOT discussing this. I am talking about mismarked dogs and colouration.

Eg - silver labs, yellow spotted dallies, harlequin danes (mismarkings), spotty labs ETC.

Discuss

Bettering the breed should be just that - making it better. Healthier. IMPROVING and INCREASING the gene pool. Breeding to ensure that the dog can do what it was ORIGINALLY bred for, and is healthy from genetic diseases (etc).

Yeah I agree.

lol - with all of it, or just that bit?

Sorry not much of a discussion with me but all of it really. I guess if you have a breed you want to ensure certain traits that make it that breed, but the health etc. is far more important rather than sacrificing for aesthetics.

Sorry maybe someone else will come along and add something else.

I can see points for and against this. Colour/markings is just one aesthetic aspect of the standards of most breeds. If you are going to argue that this is not important, then why is ear carriage, coat length, size, head shape etc etc. And some breeds have their distinguishing features for reasons other than aesthetics of course.

Colour in some instances is important for the original function of the breed eg of the Flock Guarding Dogs, some are white coloured (Maremma) or fawn (Estrela) to blend in unseen with their respective flocks. An essential feature of these breeds in their original environment and why the FGDs have very little allowance for variation in coat colour within their standards. Herding breeds OTOH are coloured to stand out from the flock eg Border Collies.

If all the various features of the breeds were considered unimportant and selection for breeding was focussed solely on health and temperament, then our breeds would lose their specific form, which has evolved as the most functional for their original purpose, and so their individuality.

If I were to argue against breeding for colour I would cite the fashion trends that occur as a results of the showring. Breeds such as the Cocker Spaniel have just about split into separate gene pools where breeders will not breed solids to partis in fear of producing mismarked pups. And patched pups in Dalmatians are disqualified from showing and breeding even though they have a reduced incidence of deafness compared to non patched pups.

There must be a happy medium in there somewhere.

ps - A gene pool cannot be increased by breeding within the breed. The only way to increase is to introduce new blood from another breed. But agree with Bodhi that certain breeding strategies, as in the Cocker Spaniel, can decrease the available gene pool.

Not being interested in showing, I would be more concerned (If I was a breeder) with breeding dogs with a good temperament.

Hmm - I thought there might be more input by now!!

Thanks to those who have contributed

I agree with what you are saying Pod - re. colouration to aid a specific job, and to me, that goes with breeding a dog for it's original purpose.

Coat length, again, same scenario - in some breeds the coat aids it's "job".. in others, it is aestethics!

The colour of a dog was often as important as anything else, I feel its wrong to dismiss this now. When breeding to the breed standard, you should take ALL points into consideration not just the bits you feel are important to you.

Most "pet" breeders dont give concern to the points Bodhi mentions, however can they be said to be "improving" the breed? I dont think so! I also dont think gene pools are small in most breeds, especially now when dogs are freely travelling all over the world, gene pools have never been so big. Even in Cats, when I fetched my kitten a few weeks ago, his father was entertaining a lady from HOLLAND!! so Cat genetics and genepools are widening too.

Dawn.

I agree with Dawn.

I would also like to add that the breed standard is what should be aspired to (breeding for temperament/health should go without saying).
Breed standards (which are reviewed from time to time) also encompass colour/markings....what is acceptable in a particular breed.

if you arent breeding pedigree dogs to its particular standard, then you arent a responsible breeder (imo).
breeding to the standard is up there with breeding for temperament, type and health imo.

we could all make it up as we go along - and then where would we be?

breeding turns up the unexpected from time to time, and it is up to the individual to take responsibility for what they have bred, but hopefully that breeder will know their lines (as far back as possible), and have some inkling of what nature might be likely to throw up.


thandi

"we could all make it up as we go along - and then where would we be?"

I think that alot of breeders are to be honest. Picking the dogs from the litter that look the best and then breeding from them. I would like to see the healthy ones being picked, the ones with good temperaments.
I want a dog, regardless of it's looks to live till it is 30. Don't tell me it's impossible, it is not. Infact we have done to OPPOSITE and created weird and wonderful, yet short lived dogs.