Hi
A *friend* of mine has an 11months old German Shepard (not KC registsered) and she has just accidently mated her with her litter brother. Now she has 6 8week old puppies. I'm really worried cuz mum is way too young for puppies and theyre interbred!
Why are some people so irresponsible?
Is there anything I can actually do about it?
She's trying to sell the pups for £180 but has had absolutely no interest in them. She has even wrote "good pedigree" on the adverts!!
:-(

Some people are just born stupid I'm afraid. There's nothing you can do about it. :(

most breeders line breed, however, brother to sister is considered a very close linebreeding. many people frown upon this type of mating unless it is for a very good reason. if it is the first generation of close breeding no apparent faults will likely be seen, (I have seen a few brother/sister father/daughter etc matings) but if those pups were bred from in the future, with close relatives, faults would start to show themselves in subsequent generations, hence the reason most people do not use this breeding method unless they really know the genetic makeup of their stock to begin with. your friend would do best to sell her puppies to pet homes preferably ones where they wont be bred from.;-)

got to disagree here.in the working dog world inbreeding is very common.it cements certain characteristics btter than outcrossing.i have seen dogs from father to daughter matings for 5 or 6 generations with no apparent ill effects.it is irresponible inbreeding that gets everyone the bad name.there is no reason that these pups if healthy can not make good dogs and will be perfectly ok to breed from imo.when inbreeding quality is of the utmost importance (why inbreed to anything that is not a top specimen anyway).too many old wives tales surround the subject.the owner does sound irresponsible though.

which line of dogs are you referring to when you say you have seen the results of father/daughter for 5 or 6 generations with no ill effects? I ask out of interest because I suspect in at least a couple of the litters, there would be pups born with some kind of deformity, or perhaps stillborn, which you may not know about (unless of course the line of dogs is one you bred yourself?) since they would most likley be culled at birth. would be interested to hear the sizes of these litters in the 5/6 generations, did they decrease in size as is often also the case?

ps we own working dogs and inbreed, so I'm very interested to hear from someone who claims to have/or have knowledge of a line which produced no deformities whatsoever during the formative stages!!

i have known closely inbred stock that had problems ie size decreasing,weak/thin bone.heart defects etc.but this is not always the case and i feel it is a question of certain quality animals can be inbred from and some can not and it is finding the ones that can.the dogs i am talking about are lurchers and i have seen the litters and seen no deformity other than a broken tail (which was done in the birthing process not geneticly).apbt breeders are probably most closely associated with inbreeding and i can see no reason they would continue to do it if they found more bad than good points with it.

you say you have known inbred stock, did you breed these dogs yourself? if not, how do you know for sure the breeder did not have problems? (not all breeders are 100% honest about their failures, although most like to promote their sucesses!!!)

which line of lurchers just out of interest?

well i was there for a couple of the births, including the last 1 six months ago when the pup with the broken tail was born,the breeder is my best mate and he would not need to lie to me.

they are from dogs that originally came from plummer and hancock

I used to be very into American Quarter horses and they frequently bred father to daughter (or similar) to get a rich gene pool.  I have heard that sometimes it can cause slightly manic animals, but for a horse breed its one of the largest registered in teh world and the most well known to have a sound temperament (although ther eare obviously always exceptions!).  It must happen in nature too with no ill effects.

well cooper!!!! that says it all!!!! if you read plummer and hancocks books, you will find that BOTH admit to having birth defects in the early stages of their close inbreeding projects, hancock chooses not to inbreed as it is not viable for him as he is a commercial breeder of collie lurchers. plummers terriers produced many deformities in the early stages and he bred father/daughter for several generations (example : omega, meaning last of the line! - watch his documentary and he states her breeding there. I would like to add i have met both men years ago and find their stock to be less than ideal for any breeding programme! hancock is reknowned for producing dogs from non-working stock and a browse through EDRD magazine will put you in touch with MANY dissatisfied customers who have had all manner of problems with their dogs, from hereditary problems to bad temperament due to poor early socialisation.  If the strain you refer to is the one bred by plummer from dogs such as fathom/merle/ilan etc, you will find numerous references in CM weekly articles and in plummers books to the problems he had when first forming this strain, with regard to birth defects and poor fertility in the later stages of his strain, in fact, that is why shortly before he died, his devoted followers chose to use a hancock outcross to "pep - up" the strain!!

i never mentioned plummer terriers so no arguement there.i am not talking of dogs except the ones i know and these have produced no defects so far.when and if they do then it  will certainly be time for an outcross.i am talking of what i know and seen not what i have read.incidently these are not now hancock/plummer dogs they came from that stock many moons ago, they are now my friends strain and every last one of 'em is worked and worked hard and true some are not so great but these are never bred from.these are worker to worker for many generations now and are everything the lads working them want (mainly ferreting companions) its a case of horses for courses.personally i think he may just have gotten lucky but again it could be down to good stockmanship.i have no interest in what plummer bred before his death or what hancock breeds today, infact i agree using non workers is a bad thing but i would certainly take one of these dogs as i know the dogs in the pedigree for generations which had no defects and all worked and how many lines can boast this ? also hancock being a commercial breeder breeds many dogs so i guess he would have many disatisfied customers purely as he sells so many, i also believe a lot fall into the wrong hands though and the dog gets blamed for the owners short comings as a trainer.
when i kept bull terriers i had some inbred ch jeep blood and i saw no defects from those litters, the jeep dogs are very inbred to in the usa and seem to be one of those lines that can take the inbreeding, some can and some can not ,this is my experience with inbreeding

the point im trying to make is that as you say, the original stock came from plummer and hancock, so how do you know that by the time your mate got one, the inbreeding defects hadnt allready been "ironed out" by the early stages of inbreeding? the majority of plummer bred dogs are inbred, quite simlpy because thats the way he bred lurchers, so he could say the were "his strain" he very rarely did outcrosses, so is it possible by the time your mate bought a dog, a lot of the inbreeding had allready been done? I dont know your mate, but I have seen a lot of hancock/plummer dogs and none of them were worth having in a kennel in my opinion. there was one years ago, a first cross, which a mate of mine owned, and she took everything, there wasnt anything she wouldnt have a try at, but she was the exception to the rule. You also mention bull terriers, thats interesting as we keep a very inbred strain of irish staffords, and we too have not had any problems inbreeding them (apart from a drop in litter size compared to an outcross) but the reason we havent is thanks to the breeders who bred the strain to begin with (who.....in all probability....had a few pups from time to time, which had problems!!!!!) the best thing to do would be to ask someone who has bred a very inbred line of dogs from scratch (as you cannot truly call a strain your own until you have done this!) and see if they have had any problems, I suspect most breeders who have done this would admit they have had soem problems in early generations, I for one would be VERY interested to hear from someone who has bred a line of dogs in this way, and not encountered any problems :-)

everybody has to start somewhere unless you get the first dog ever born.the dogs that came from hancock and plummer to my mate were unrelated 1 a beardie cross the other a border cross and he started this way and has had no problem with his breeding programme by doing his own selective inbreeding.you say not one was worth kennel space then tell of a good one a friend had years how do you know the dogs i am talking of are not similar to this female.personally i would not touch one of those "irish staffords" i know most of the men personally that developed them and i have my good reasons for staying clear, my choice but each to their own.

<<i am talking of what i know and seen not what i have read.>>

This is all very well - we all need to have personal experience to be able to advise on anything, but we must also read, read, read as much as we can as well. In my personal experience with my own bitches over many years, still-births and neonatal deaths are merely a scare-story which never happen. Clearly that is false and I have been lucky. Just because we haven't experienced something doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

i agree but the dogs he bought were from first crosses without any inbreeding and he started there so he knew that the problems encountered by the said breeders were not present in what he started with.if he does get problems then he will be looking for a good outcross straight away.infact he is not kennel blind and if he sees something that will improve his stock for his needs that is unrelated i believe he will not hesitate to use it.

top jolly! :-)pleased for your friend, he must be one of a very select few who hasnt had ANY problems with close inbreeding, most honest breeders will admit to having a few problems, even if it is only a drop in litter size. I personally wouldnt have a hancock or plummer dog, but a mate did and she was a good 'un, this still would not be enough to tempt me, as I believe there are far better strains of collie lurcher bred by people who do a lot more work with them than plummer or hancock ever did. Have you heard of phil buckney  leeds? he owns a strain of linebred collie lurchers which he bred himself from scratch, I met him at a terriershow years back and we chatted about inbreeding, he had a few pups which were born deformed in a couple of litters and was honest enough to say so. his stock are good workers, they are beardie/border bred, a 5/8 3/8 type, excellent hunters. Also, you may have heard of sarah moffat from scotland  she breeds collie lurchers, from a david james line, and she inbred them father/daughter for about 4 generations, until she got only one pup litters, I think she gave up after that, and went on to outcrosses. my brother had a dog from her, a black/white halfcross type bitch which has done everything he wants in a dog, and more. he went up to scotland to hunt and meet her and her dogs, she gave him a detailed pedigree, which showed a lot of inbreeding. tessa was the only pup in the litter. If you are a commercial breeder of dogs, then one pup litters are a bit of a problem would you not agree?

as for irish staffords, well......everyone is entitled to their own opinion, IMO irish staffords are superior to the short, squat KC types, the men who bred them also inbred heavily, as to whether or not they had many problems in the early days, I couldnt say, we havent had any with our dogs, but like your friend with the lurchers, weve been very lucky :-)

well the last litter (a few months back now) produced 9 healthy pups so i do not know what else i can tell you other than its working for him and all the pups were kept by friends to be worked, they do for us end of story,just as those other people sound happy with their own stock,they do not need please anyone but us.
as i said i know most of those that bred some of the well known irish dogs.they crossed to various breeds including ebt and in some cases apbt,wheaten etc and just because a pedigree does not say it does not mean its not there.no idea how your dogs are bred but as you will know psycho was 1/16 ebt, stormer was an ebt cross (that never mated a stafford female but had papers hung that said he did).the dublin red dog lines are in question owing to paper hanging by one of its earlier developers, the flynn dogs came down off lynchahaun ( a dog of unknown blood).maybe they have been inbred to lately but the fact is they are stafford crosses and always will be imo.i have seen some i liked but they were few and far between and a very poor substitute for the apbt imo . i could go on but its obvious we will not agree.
ps not a big lover of the over squat kc stafford either but there are some nice kc dogs about if you look for them.

IMO a stafford "cross"  is better than some of the KC types ive seen in recent years. I would rather have a "cross" (if you can call 1/16 EBT in an otherwise stafford breeding, a cross) as thats the type of dog I like. I agree about APBTs, there are alot of poor quality ISBTs being bred, but unfortunately owning a well bred pure APBT in this day and age, is like looking for rocking horse droppings! been good chinwagging with you anyway. :-)

ABSOLUTELY LMAO! How can a cross be better than a KC registered dog? The breed type is upto the kennel owner i.e. short and stocky or longer legged and more athletic. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN ISBT. Staffords can be bred in Ireland all day long but they are still STAFFORDSHIRE BULL TERRIERS.

staffiehappy it would be better to visit some staffy shows and see the dogs around at the moment . There are some fat, heavy, unfit dogs I agree but ideally at a good show they are not
dont really think you can say a staffy cross is better than a KC registered one - thats a silly comment

As an outsider, can I ask are the puppy purchasers told that these dogs are unregistered cross breeds, or are they told that the pups are "rare, blue IRISH Staffordshires" and therefore worth more money?

puppy purchasers are told the pups are pedigreed (which they are, we supply 4 generation certs) Irish staffordhshire bull terriers. most people are aware what the differences are, if anyone isnt, we give them a full run down on the differences between the two types, and let them make up their own minds. the majority of people who get in touch are after an irish dog as they share my wife and I's opinion that Irish dogs are superior to the type recognised by the KC. :-)

dear lel, I dont think it is a "silly" comment at all, it is MY OPINION, which a lot of other people who own and admire Irish staffs share with me. I dont agree with your opinions, but I wouldnt call them "silly" - that would be a pretty rude thing to say, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. we have sold a few litters over the years, so obviously there are lots of people who would disagree with you. :-)

How can you say a crossbreed is better than a purebred if you love the breed ?
Crossed with what breed do you consider better than the standard ?

Lots of people that disagree with me ?? Can you tell me why the Irish isnt recognised by the UK Kennel Club then ? Especially since it originated from the short squat types you dislike so much ?
As I have said on MANY occasions , I like both breeds for different reasons

How can you give a pedigree to someone for an Irish Staffordshire Bull Terrier when the breed doens't even exist?!?!?!?!?!?!? If your sell a puppy knowing that it will be over the KC guidelines when it reaches maturity then you should not sell it as ANY KIND of Staffordshire as the breed standard clearly state 14-16 inches at the withers s the accepted size. 'Desirable height at withers 35.5 - 40.5 cms (14 - 16 ins.), these heights being related to the weights' You are entitled to breed your CROSSBREEDS and sell them for whatever you feel is an acceptable amount but please do not taint the STAFFORDSHIRE BULL TERRIER with the same brush as your IRISH bred dog. The standard was drawn up by the GB and NI council so if your dogs are not bred in those countries then you can't call it a Stafford unless it matches the standard as it is written!!!!!

if you know the parents/grandparents/great grandparents etc of the dog you have bred whatever breed it may be then surely you can supply the new owner with a handwritten pedigree telling them how the dog is bred? personally i agree with the others who have said they like the irish dogs best i prefer them to normal KC staffs and they ARE a breed, just not one thats recognised by the KC.

Well said luxnallsstaffs!! May I add that the Irish Kennel Club in NO way recognises this breed either and the standard for SBT's is the same here as in Britian.

I can't believe what I am reading on here at all!! I am a very proud Staffordshire Bull Terrier owner in Ireland and I am mortified to read about people actually supporting the crossbreeding of staff's with god knows what and then justifying it by saying it is and ISBT. The ISBT was an actual breed developed from the SBT but there has been so much of this crossbreeding that there is no recognised breed and if this continues there never will be. How you can say that it is an ISBT just because it looks like one even though is is 1/10th this and 1/4 that is ludicrous!!!!

Any fool can provide a pedigree. All a pedigree is is a family tree that shows who a dogs parents, grandparents etc are, that does not mean that they are a properly bred dog or that they are a proper breed. They are not KC registered and should not have ANY name associated with them at all!! They should be sold and seen as crosses and that is that!!

If they were a genuine breed that was being bred selectivley to try and promote a new breed and they had genuine roots then fair enough, but they aren't they are people just breeding this with that to get a look that they like!!

I saw a very good looking Boxer x Rottweiler before, should I run out, call them a german boxer and start breeding them just because I like the look....NO!!!

A dog should only be bred as part of a careful breeding program, where the breeder researches the pedigree of the dog and is doing it to enhance the breed for the better. There are enough crossbreeds who are very beautiful in rescues all over the world who would love a home, so if you want one of those then go out and rescue one, do not put more on the streets by selling them as something they are not!!

the reasons the cross breedings took place was not just a whim, the dogs were used in the badger trials  (teastas mor) which were legal in ireland so any dog that excelled was mated to the best dogs of the day so a good stafford was mated to a good ebt to produce good trial dogs.i agree the name irish stafford should not be used.maybe something like irish trial bull terrier or teastas mor bull terrier would stop the confusion.

I'm sorry but you can not say a breed does not exhist (sp) just because it is not recognised by the KC, maybe like Cooper said, the name of the breed should be altered.

I own an American Bulldog, this is not a kc breed but she is american bulldog through & through, & before anyone says the american bulldog is a mixture of breeds, yes it was, but so was every kc breed a cross breed once upon a time.

So who is to say that in years to come the ISBT won't be recognised by the kc (name changed or outherwise)

Whitebull I agree with you about American Bulldogs, but the whole point of that is that now only American Bulldogs are bred to American Bulldogs to make more American Bulldogs. Athough they are an original mixture of breeds, as all purebred dogs are, they were a certain mix and now there is no more crossing, just breeding to the same breed. With ISBT's people just breed a Staff with anything to get the right look and then pass them off as ISBT's which has ruined the original breed that was in the past.

I also agree that the name should be different. American Staffordshire Terriers are never mixed up with Staffordshire BULL Terriers that are bred in America as the names differ. The Irish Staffordshire Bull Terrier Association, which is a Staffordshire Bull Terrier breed club, often gets mixed up for a ISBT club. People often assume that if you breed SBT's and are in Ireland then they are ISBT's. There should a clear definition.

I very much doubt now that ISBT's will EVER be recognised by any KC as the original stock has been compromised and thanks to irresponsible breeding the chances have most probably been ruined.

I have a friend who's nephew breeds Irish Staffords.  To be honest up until afew weeks ago I had never heared of an Irish Staffordshire Bull Terrier.  When I asked my friend what an Irish Stafford looked like she said, "Exactly the same as an ordinary stafford only longer in the leg and slightly thinner."  I asked her if he was a breeder recognised by the KC she said no but his father is.

I have recently seen an ad in our adpaper and someone is selling ISBT for an unbelievably high amount considering they are not a breed recognized by the KC.  To be honest the pups picture looked like a larger than average Border Collie.