Inbreeding

RutlandH2O said:
....... How can mindsets be altered?
Click to expand...

It's called swimming against the tide, I'm sorry to tell you, and will be a fruitless exercise, whilst the bulk of the populous believe that "the tide" actually have the best interest of any breed at heart.

Too many breeders will succeed at any cost, and to many breed societies appear to encourage them. The last thing to be given any consideration, is the dog, it seems to me.

Alec.
 
I also watched the Pedigree Dog programme.

Many years ago I bred the occasional litter of KC registered gundogs, all from working stock. I think I am correct in saying that the only verification the KC needed then, was that I signed the form to register the litter saying who the parents were.

Is that still the case?

In the pony breed I am involved in, when you register a foal, there has to be a DNA sample from the Stallion. The foal has to be microchipped, but only after the mare and foal have been seen together, and DNA samples taken from both by the vet.

Do the KC require any DNA samples now, when a litter is registered?

If not, surely there is nothing to prevent an unscrupulous breeder/kennels claiming that a litter was bred in a particular way to make more money, when in fact the parentage is totally different, perhaps for example Father/Daughter. Probably easier to do, when the breed is whole coloured/uniformly marked, so individual dogs are less able to be identified.

I appreciate that this is opening a whole can of worms....:eek: but to further add to the mix, surely some of the judging is to blame?

A further thought would be that if there is nothing the 'ethical' Judge likes, that is 'fit for function' etc., then first place be withheld, as they do in gundog Field Trials. Otherwise the whole thing becomes self generating i.e. the best of a bad bunch get awarded prizes, as the Judge has no other option!

Perhaps the Judges already have this choice? I wouldn't know. :confused:
 
My young bitch has a COI of 6.4% and I hope to breed from her later this year, if I use the dog that I plan to the litter's COI will be 1.6%. The dog and bitch's COR (coefficient of relationship) will be 3.0%, this figure shows in % terms how related the parents are in a potential mating.
 
Rutland I have to say there were people in our breed standing up and coming clean and removing their dogs from stud once they discovered they were epilepsy problems as far back as the 1960s and 70s.
Anyone I know who has owned or produced an epileptic (I mean this I could count on one hand, in fairness) has been very upfront and let everyone know.
At the risk of flaming, epilepsy has crept back into the lines of the more unusually pigmented examples of the breed, put it that way (no surprise as the gene pool is more limited) and there is not quite so much honesty about it :(

The father daughter mating I mentioned, was not for money, the person retained all the pups and was quite open about doing it. Never heard how they turned out.
 
My mally pups are 0.5%,breed average is 8.5%.
My samoyed is (eeeekkk) 13.1%, breed average is 6.4%

I wish there was a programme like this when I was breeding chinchillas - I had to work out the co efficient of matings by hand - nightmare with 250 chins!! There was one around for pig breeding, and a chin breeder had adapted it somehow, but was charging nearly 500 quid for it :O
 
CaveCanem said:
Rutland I have to say there were people in our breed standing up and coming clean and removing their dogs from stud once they discovered they were epilepsy problems as far back as the 1960s and 70s.
Anyone I know who has owned or produced an epileptic (I mean this I could count on one hand, in fairness) has been very upfront and let everyone know.
At the risk of flaming, epilepsy has crept back into the lines of the more unusually pigmented examples of the breed, put it that way (no surprise as the gene pool is more limited) and there is not quite so much honesty about it :(

The father daughter mating I mentioned, was not for money, the person retained all the pups and was quite open about doing it. Never heard how they turned out.
Click to expand...

My experience of epilepsy, in the breed I ultimately left, was as diametrically opposed to that which you describe above as is humanly possible. Not only is there complete denial, but the extent of the refusal to accept the problem has produced new names for the condition. It's as if changing the name reduces the implications of the affliction. In an article I wrote several years ago, I said "owning an epileptic dog is all about living with an animal with a neurological disease whose threshold to certain, as yet, unknown stimuli is quite low. It is not about ostracism, condemnation, censure and blame. Owning a dog with epilepsy isn't a crime. But owning one, giving its affliction a more "acceptable" name, breeding it and selling the offspring as unaffected, should be." My suggestion that support for research into DNA markers was not welcomed. I wasn't held in very high esteem once that article was published.

Re: the father/daughter mating: some years ago, a breeder, devastated by a particular inherited disease, suggested breeding father/daughter, mother/son, sister/brother in an effort to expose the disease. After lengthy discussions with other breeders, geneticists, vets, the decision was scrapped because of the various impediments to reaping answers: the age of onset could be many years; the space available to house the number of pups (a large breed with large litters); the considerable costs involved; the welfare of those pups with the affliction, and the ultimate arrangements for those littermates without the condition, but possible carriers.
 
RutlandH2O said:
Perhaps someone could enlighten me. I was involved in purebred dogs in the U.S. for over 25 years. I bred, exhibited, gave handling and grooming classes, was the president of a breed club, organised specialty shows and lectures on health and breeding, prepared the art and copy for dog show catalogues (both specialty and all breed). In all those years I was aware of only 2 breedings of brother/sister or father/daughter, and both were the results of unfortunate accidents. In both incidents the breeders culled the pups at birth/kept all of the 4 pups for life (they were hounds). Is inbreeding (brother/sister, father/daughter, mother/son) really that prevalent? I know linebreeding is a common practice. Half-brother to half-sister in outcrossed individuals is a breeding method used to set type. Grandparent to grandchild is also utilised (an old saying, coming from horses, is "let the sire of the sire be the grandsire of the dam on the dam's side"). I ask this question because of last night's BBC4 program on dog breeding. I, too, preferred this program to its predecessor. So often I hear people refer to purebred dogs as being inbred, or blaming heritable problems on inbreeding. I always answer those remarks with the retort that inbreeding doesn't cause those problems, it just manifests what's already there genetically. But is the practice of very close breeding that common amongst breeders (puppy mills excluded)?

In both programs I found Mark Evans quite irritating and a force for negativity in an already negative situation. He just rubbed me the wrong way. I welcomed the comments of the other professionals/owners/scientists. The Dally story was a breath of fresh air. Watching the Pug struggling to breathe was heartbreaking. A force for change is in the breeders' and judges' hands. The Kennel Club and the American Kennel Club are dog registries. They are not policing agencies. They exist to give credibility to purebred dogs. They are not going to take the kind of stand needed to rectify these problems and, in the process, lose revenue. It's the breed societies that have this responsibility. It's quite interesting how some clubs have got their priorities in the right order, and others...do ostrich and sand ring any bells?

In the US, the Boxer breed is plagued with von Willibrands disease and a high incidence of cancer. Deafness in Dalmatians is a major problem (I mention these breeds in reference to last night's program). I used to be a member of a breed club, in this country, where epilepsy and breathing problems (elongated soft palate) within the dogs are rife. The attitude of denial within this group of breeders/exhibitors is monumental. I stopped breeding, neutered all the dogs, and let my membership lapse. I tried to make a difference. I really, really tried. But, for nothing. I couldn't be a part of it any longer. And the roster of devastated pet owners gets longer within that breed.
Click to expand...

At last a voice of informed reason.Breeding co-efficents are not the only consideration,breeding show dogs is about combining the very best you can while keeping health to the fore.It is the endless puzzle where the missing bit will never be found..though you try your damnedest to do it.There should be absolutely no denial involved,complete integrity is a must..if only to yourself! We breeders are not actually hell bent on churning out little wads of cash..after forty years at it the colour is red..but at last my minis are getting better,smaller,healthier and long living.It is a long hard road,so please never compare us diehards to someone doing a cash crop off a few mottley family pets .
There are quite a large proportion out there just like me,trying hard to breed the very best,both in the showring and in the home.It does worry and annoy that others may cut corners,little can be done about something that is`nt illegal. I could not continue with breeding unhealthy dogs as the writer quoted.
 
Spudlet said:
Mark Evans made me laugh when he said about how shows should be about health and fitness and wotnot - soooo kind of like working trials then? But oh no, the RSPCA isn't keen on working dogs either... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Am I mistaken ..but did`nt he say "it is like polishing a turd"? Had me in stitches:D:D
 
EAST KENT said:
At last a voice of informed reason.Breeding co-efficents are not the only consideration,breeding show dogs is about combining the very best you can while keeping health to the fore.It is the endless puzzle where the missing bit will never be found..though you try your damnedest to do it.There should be absolutely no denial involved,complete integrity is a must..if only to yourself! We breeders are not actually hell bent on churning out little wads of cash..after forty years at it the colour is red..but at last my minis are getting better,smaller,healthier and long living.It is a long hard road,so please never compare us diehards to someone doing a cash crop off a few mottley family pets .
There are quite a large proportion out there just like me,trying hard to breed the very best,both in the showring and in the home.It does worry and annoy that others may cut corners,little can be done about something that is`nt illegal. I could not continue with breeding unhealthy dogs as the writer quoted.
Click to expand...

You've said it all!! Bravo!!
 
RutlandH2O said:
In both programs I found Mark Evans quite irritating and a force for negativity in an already negative situation. He just rubbed me the wrong way.


Rutland Mark Evans has always been an irritating twit . He use to be my vet 18 ish years ago and he was deeply unpleasent and had a bedside manner of a serial killer . Someone else said he talked of having fit dogs( didn't see this latest programme though saw the first one)but when I took a dally in he laid into me for having my dog too fit .He had a common injury of racing greyhounds on the rear instead of front in greyhounds and it was all my fault and I should be ashamed of having a fit dog :eek:!he then said all dalmatians were neurotic like their owners:eek:!
Click to expand...
 
Blanche said:
RutlandH2O said:
In both programs I found Mark Evans quite irritating and a force for negativity in an already negative situation. He just rubbed me the wrong way.


Rutland Mark Evans has always been an irritating twit . He use to be my vet 18 ish years ago and he was deeply unpleasent and had a bedside manner of a serial killer . Someone else said he talked of having fit dogs( didn't see this latest programme though saw the first one)but when I took a dally in he laid into me for having my dog too fit .He had a common injury of racing greyhounds on the rear instead of front in greyhounds and it was all my fault and I should be ashamed of having a fit dog :eek:!he then said all dalmatians were neurotic like their owners:eek:!
Click to expand...

:eek: twit indeed!! Sounds like a loony! Glad my vets not like that!
Click to expand...
 
Blanche said:
RutlandH2O said:
In both programs I found Mark Evans quite irritating and a force for negativity in an already negative situation. He just rubbed me the wrong way.


Rutland Mark Evans has always been an irritating twit . He use to be my vet 18 ish years ago and he was deeply unpleasent and had a bedside manner of a serial killer . Someone else said he talked of having fit dogs( didn't see this latest programme though saw the first one)but when I took a dally in he laid into me for having my dog too fit .He had a common injury of racing greyhounds on the rear instead of front in greyhounds and it was all my fault and I should be ashamed of having a fit dog :eek:!he then said all dalmatians were neurotic like their owners:eek:!
Click to expand...

Blanche: "...and had a bedside manner of a serial killer." Best line I've heard in ages!!!!!

When Evans appeared in the first program, I thought I knew him from somewhere, but just couldn't make the connection. When he started to speak, that feeling was confirmed. I still can't remember why he made such a negative impression on me. It must have been another program years earlier. He has got to be the most contrary, dismissive, cynical individual...the worst person to make representations of what is right and what is wrong. He attitudes, his choice of words (turd?), his demeanour have the most recoiling effect, at least to my mind. When he hosted the first program, I was feeling combative even before the facts were presented.
Click to expand...
 
GOSH! one of my border collies is 15.6 with a breed average of 3.4!!! Very surprised by that actually! I think this is such a good idea and would affect whether I bought a pup.
 
Blanche said:
RutlandH2O said:
In both programs I found Mark Evans quite irritating and a force for negativity in an already negative situation. He just rubbed me the wrong way.


Rutland Mark Evans has always been an irritating twit . He use to be my vet 18 ish years ago and he was deeply unpleasent and had a bedside manner of a serial killer . Someone else said he talked of having fit dogs( didn't see this latest programme though saw the first one)but when I took a dally in he laid into me for having my dog too fit .He had a common injury of racing greyhounds on the rear instead of front in greyhounds and it was all my fault and I should be ashamed of having a fit dog :eek:!he then said all dalmatians were neurotic like their owners:eek:!
Click to expand...

Dobiegirl said:
I think he also presented Channel 4 Inside Natures Giants.
Click to expand...

Yes, he does. But, my knowledge of him predates that program by many years. Perhaps I should Google his name and see if there are any biographies of his TV work.
Click to expand...
 
I seem to think he was on tv in one of those tv vet programmes or something? He's been around for a while.

He sounds and comes across as a complete twonk
 
At the time he ( M E)was my vet he was doing childrens tv and was so full of it then but has appeared to get worse with each tv program he has done .

Forgot to say there was a small article in The Sunday Times about inbreeding in dogs and explained it in simpleton terms that I could understand:p:D! Did anyone else see it ?
 
Dobiegirl said:
250 Chinchillas are you mad:D we had 2 and that was bad enough.

I presume they were not pets, cant imagine 250 chinchillas running and leaping about.
Click to expand...

LOL they were breeding animals - I used to show them, and give talks to vets, as at the time they were quite a rarity as a pet. I have got a small collection of pelts from my stock that died naturally :eek:

It was a bit of a madhouse though, Dobie!



Epilepsy crops up from time to time in my breed (malamutes); there are a few good breeders around, who wouldn't dream of breeding from epi stock (assuming it was diagnosed before that occured), but there seem to be lots of BYB who don't worry about epi, nor hip/eye scores and will breed whatever with whatever.
As long as it's KC reg'd, which as far as I'm concerned means nothing, people will part with money for a pup!
 
I agree Misterjay about the KC not meaning a thing, the general public seem to think if its KC registered its top notch but without health testing the parents it is worthless imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top