Just a few thoughts based on some of the recent posts that I have read :

We now appear to have "created" breeds that appear to be genetic disaster areas!

A breed has been described as being extremely difficult to mate, needing the assistance of 2 expert humans to help things along!
Numerous breeds where the need for C-sections is the norm. Now surely both these issues are natures way of telling us that if this was a species it would be doomed!

We also have dogs that we are terrified of allowing to have any kind of robust exercise (including the potentially lethal stair-climbing! ;-) )for fear of messing up its future health (or hip score). I'm not advocating running pups into the ground, but would suggest that if they cant achieve a decent hip score without wrapping in cotton wool then they shouldn't be bred from!

On a similar note we have breeds where the average hip score is somewhere around the 40 mark!

The giant breeds have now been bred to such an unnaturally large size, that any that make it past 10 years are the exception.

Other breeds have been bred to a standard where normal breathing is a big issue, and hot weather potentially life threatening.

The list goes on!

Now all of the above issues have (to my memory) been listed as normal breed issues rather than the exception from puppy farmers & 'back-yard' breeders.

Is it time for some of these breeders to:
1. Call it a day and just let some breeds die out?
2. Revise the breed standards  / showing criteria?
3. Add in fresh blood from other breeds?
4. Let the 'back-yard' breeders have free reign as they probably wouldn't do any worse a job?
5. Leave things alone?

Just a few points to chew on ;-)

Interesting points you make - I actually do agree, whenever you consider getting a pedigree dog these days you always have to consider the common place health issues associated with the breed. I know that you cant stop dogs getting diseases the same as people get them but it does seem that when everyone comes looking for a dog the first thing they get is a long list of health problems that could be associated with the breed.

I know i will probably get jumped on for this and im not saying ive never had healthy pedigree dogs, but our rescue dog lived until 16, she was fit until she got older and had some tuours but recovered remarkably quickly, wanted to play and run every day until she died.

And also your new blood comment, i know people on here are against cross breeds because so many end up in resuces.......but didnt most of todays breeds come from some sort of cross breed, i know when we were getting Leo (sheltie) and i was reading about the breed history it mentioned all sorts of dogs that were cross bred to make todays sheltie......although you could then always end up with the health problems of both breeds :(

But when they were 'designing' the breeds originally they were probably rather more practical about culling what didn't work out right, rather than selling it to the unsuspecting public. ;)

If you cross good healthy breeding stock of different breeds, you have a fair chance of good healthy puppies.  If you cross breeds that have genetic defects, the cross will not make them magically disappear - they will either be present in the cross-bred pups or recessive faults will be lurking to come out in future generations.

I have to say, with a measure of caution and NO WISH to be dictated to by Europe, that I do believe it's unacceptable to have breeds whose inherent make-up limits their life - and I personally wouldn't touch with a bargepole any breed where a good percentage need caesars.

M.

I think for the breeds that were originally bred to perform a law abiding function I would prefer to see, as discussed on another thread, a form of testing such as is conducted in Germany prior to KC registration and breeding.

If we breed solely for the show ring we will tend to select for specific physical attributes but often deselect working ability/traits; like anything else if we do not breed FOR something it will disappear.

I have a gundog breed and in its country of origin it cannot be registered until and unless it passes both an aptitude test for its intended role as well as conformation tests.  I would like that to be considered the norm in the gundog breeds and there are shepherding tests for the pastoral breeds.  The working breeds abroad have to have Schutzhund qualifications I believe before they will be bred from etc; how many of the working breeds here could train for and pass a BH let alone Sch I, II or III?

I don't consider my dogs to be molly coddled when they are adult, in fact quite the reverse but I DO take with their growth just as much as I did with my daughter when she was a toddler and do not intend to apologise for it. ;)

Havok,

I couldn't agree with you more. And look at temperament. I can't believe all the screwy sounding dogs out there who were so known for their lovely, friendly disposition, like Goldens. I realize that some of it can come from poor socialization and no discipline...just plain not doing enough with dogs, but in the old days, you never heard of such weird temperaments....excessive shyness, aggressiveness....There are a lot of crappy breeders out there. They should have to pass some more stringent exams before breeding or allowing their puppies to be registered which would slow them down.

It seems whenever there's a super popular dog and the numbers go up, then there come the problems. Take Dobermans for instance in the 70s here. They were the "in" dog to have. Now it's Rottweilers. Today's Dobermans are are greatly improved, but have to live down the reputation for indiscriminate viciousness they got in the 70s.

And to respond to the inquiry of originating breeds by mixing different dogs. Of course, that was done for all the breeds. But there's something called fixing a type. And that's the scientific breeding practices with aims toward a certain goal. It goes toward fixing or making it so each litter comes out looking the same and then being a specific, fixed breed. It's not indiscriminately (love that word) breeding a bunch of dogs and just making more dogs of all different mixes.

>>>>but in the old days, you never heard of such weird temperaments....excessive shyness, aggressiveness...<<<<<<<<<
i think a lot of this comes from everybody and their neighbour breeding 'pedigree' dogs to make a quick buck!!
Archer

Yes, exactly. You're probably right. You never heard of it much. But in the case of Dobermans, in the early days they were quite sharp, aggressive. It took time and careful selection to get their temperaments more mellow without losing their working ability and they've undergone great changes in appearance too. They are quite a recent breed relatively speaking.

How about testing all breeds? Not necessarily against a job of work, but just a general physical & temperament test. Something along the lines of - can it run? can it jump at least its own height? Is it capable of sensible physical exercise? Whilst this would probably be too hard to introduce as a requirement for breeding, i would really like to see it as a requirement before making up into a champion! I know dogs are 'moved' in the show ring, but that does not constitute anything like the test i would like! 

It always amuses me when Peter Purvis (on the Crufts programme) enthuses when a toy breed can actually make it from one side of the ring to the other, or where a giant breed can actually move in a coordinated and sound way!

How about not repeat breeding a bitch that required a c-section and not breeding from pups born in this way? Would be interested to hear the impact on some breeds of this one?