But that's when education becomes the key...

Plus convincing them to change their ways when breeding and there's hard evidence from geneticist
and others who've looked at show records of different breeds to prove that you don't need to line
breed/inbreed to breed winners in the ring.

The art is having the knowledge (or learning the knowledge through breed mentors) to be able to do this.
That's where people come unstuck because most aren't prepared to learn or some with the knowledge and talent
don't want to share their 'hard earned' knowledge and so the breed becomes
bottle necked with popular sire syndrome as it's far easier to go to a popular show dog with x number of progeny in
the ring (they don't think about the numbers of those produced by the popular sire that aren't good enough...)
than perhaps to look at the not so 'fashionable' show/working kennels who have equally nice dogs with good health, longevity,
good temperaments etc but who aren't inbred and will compliment the bitch on her plus points and hopefully improve on her
weaker points etc.

Plus having the patience (most want instant winners) to look at the long term benefits and the long term goals that you
wish to achieve. As sometimes the benefits won't come out in the first generation but two or three generations later.

Breeding of dogs certainly isn't for the feint hearted

Totally agree Westcoast,  we can talk till the cows come home but it is like a good old fashioned recipe really.  It is a bit of everything but it must all be good to get the finished article.

The low or high % won't make the blindest difference unless the person understands everything else that goes with it.. breed type, the pedigree, ( not the names on it but the dog) how often do you hear people say they know the pedigree inside out, but quite often it is the names they know not the dogs. 

All very complicated really :-)

(they don't think about the numbers of those produced by the popular sire that aren't good enough...)

that was my point earlier on .. when people talk about top producing dogs,  what % of off spring are top quality.

A dog used two or three times but producing 3 champions is far more valuable to me that a dog used 100 times having produced 10 champions. Statistically the first dog has produced better.  That is where I don't like some of the competitions.  The competitions " may" encourage matador breeding techniques.

Thankfully one or two of my dog freinds do :-) 

IMO that's what phenotypical based breeding is....finding the animals with the physical attributes ( including the above) to mate together, rather than looking for relatives of a named individual.

If they share close family members ...then I consider the in breeding coefficient, but health, quality and temperament are phenotypes

Said it all for me :-D :-D

Why not set something up yourself to do the coefficients, in border collies there is such a wonderful person and there's a website that not only works out the coefficients but also you can check hip scores, tests, likelihood of diseases etc  Obviously it's only as good as the data input but I'm sure with a numerically small breed this would be straightforward...it certainly seems to work with the collies and is invaluable.  I can trace my dogs back to 1900 and check up their pedigrees etc.  Marvellous!

I'm not that computer literate, I do my pedigrees in word, LOL.

What with Norwegian, Swedish, Finnish American and UK pedigrees not such an easy task.

Can i ask what an uncle and niece breeding would be classed as ? line or in breeding? have just realised one of my dog's has this mating in her pedigree ...

Would that be full Uncle to niece or Half (the latter is a very good linebreeding combination in my experience).

Uncle was true brother ...

Most would call that inbreeding leaving parent to offspring, and siblings as inbreeding (which the Kennel club no longer allow). 

The term line breeding simply describes a lower degree of relationship, or one not immediately easily pigeon holed/more complex relationships with common ancestors.