toy dog

We should perhaps be clear that this is a list of both congenital and hereditary conditions complied by LIDA. Some of the conditions are listed as a result of a vet seeing a dog in their clinic that the owner says is that breed and reporting the condition for the database. There is no indication in this list which are genetic and which are congenital as a result of (for example) one reporting. I will give an example: The listing of Vaginal Hyperplasia for Pyrenean Mountain Dog was the result of a vet seeing a puppy of that breed with a mild case of this condition (which later corrected as the pup grew) and reporting it to the database. I also find it interesting that they specifically list X-Linked PRA for the breed when there is currently no genetic data available on PRA on the Pyrenean, with the exception of a genetic marker for CMR. so we don't even know if they are purebred and could infact have another breed in them only taking the word of the owner of the dog??????? if they were testing gene pools in registered chihuahuas with breeders i might be inclined to not question. looking up PRA the papillon can be affected with PRA as well as collies no mention of sheltie though, x-linked is only in the husky and bullmastiff.

I have never heard of a connection between any of the PRA diseases and merle gene, ca you give me a refference for where you read that? Dachshounds and shetland sheepdogs do have PRA but not X linked, so it could not have come from them. 'other ones they listed, they are quite common not only in chis but in all toy breeds across the board' Sorry not following, are you sayin that all the rest of disease (22 of them)are common in chis and in all toys? So are they being tested/screened for, or just considered part of the toy breeds? Are most breeders at least doing a certified eye exam and Cardic exam by speicalist vets on al their breeding dogs? It seems like the only disease you are worried about is Patellas, but from looking at this list I would say it's severity impact level on the dog would not be that high as compared to many of these diesease, such as Hydrocephalus, Hepatic Encephalopathy, Portosystemic, Hypoplasia of dens or Myasthenia Gravis amoung others. At least PL can be repaired and the dogs can usualy live a normal life, most these others would be far more impacting on their lives and even fatal. chihuahuas were crossed with papillons, miniature pinschers, pomeranians and when the americans discovered them some of the first ones did also have other breeds in them like terriers for instance. i seem to be repeating myself. im saying that those diseases can also be shared amongst other breeds of dogs. I am referring to patellas as i said being in this breed for many years and seeing many examples of my breed - that this problem is the most common one. i've never heard of a chihuahua affected with PRA, as i say i just wonder where they got their test subjects from and what was the percentage of this disease that they found in chihuahuas. not to say that there are dogs that can and do suffer from all those other problems they listed. patella luxation is wide spread and very very common. so now go off and try and read me out of that quote too why don't you. i've said over and over again and i will repeat one more time for you. its hard enough to get breeders to test for the most common ailment which is Patella luxation so do you think they are testing for heart and eyes? given that they aren't testing for PL? our breed is relatively healthy otherthan for the patella luxation. its an oberservation on my part as i say seeing many examples over 25-26 years in the breed. so i spose you will get material from the net to prove me wrong on that one too. i'll wait for it.......... play on words, other breeds can be affected by those other problems too. common = patella luxation. im not saying there is a connection between merle and PRA. !!!! stop trying to herd me into a corner and prove me wrong SS, i don't really appreciate it. im off to vaccum my house thanks rather than sitting on here all day wasting my time.

i dont know why a breed standard has to be so open to individual interpretation. cant really fathom that at all, some say for eg. moderately short nose, so what is moderately short nose. ours for instance says, weight can be from 2-6 lbs with a preference being 4-6 lbs. no height specifications at all so a dog can be quite tall and still be within weight range. so some people who are enquring about pups ask for height measurements. i dont' know why that can't be included in the standard and other breed standards as well. pretty vague really isn't it.

maybe your auntie has spent more time with your dog than you? as i said earlier, chihuahuas will pick their human and bond straight away with that human. it happens in our family, i share my dogs with my elderly parents. so sometimes a puppy will choose my mother or father over me. but usually it is because they feed the dog spend alot of time with the dog.....how old is rascal? it sounds like his temperament is fear over stangers and other dogs, and yes once its set in its pretty hard to reverse - my experience has been you can't really reverse it, it requires alot of training to what i call "mask" which means they will get use to it all and not be so fazed by it but still be the same dog. i.e. still fearful of other dogs and people. you cant really change a dogs temperament they are what they are through the dogs genes or it could be through the way it was reared.

Most? Australian or overseas clubs you are looking at? no aussie chi clubs have any info on breed related health, we use to have it but the webmaster has taken it off for the time being. i noted on the USA chi club that since 2006 some of their show lines are coming up with SM. I just wonder looking at that link you posted of uni of sydney, where did they get their test subjects from, last submission it said was on the 7th of june. i could well believe PRA might be in the american dogs as its a well known fact that merle chis have turned up there by crossing shelties, dachund and other breeds with merle genes. as for the other ones they listed, they are quite common not only in chis but in all toy breeds across the board. as i have said before, trying to get breeders attitudes to change to test before breeding is an almighty challenge. i felt like those people did in PDE trying to get the cav breeders to test their stock for SM. and still there were some that refused to test and continued to breed selfishly. it seems like the american club has health clinics where all breeders can get their dogs checked and certified by specialists so they are a bit more switched on than here in our clubs, this has been BTW suggested many times over the years with not much interest. as the national club determined when asked to address issues, "its up to the individual breeder to decide on the best option for each their stock"....IMO, this gets us nowhere, big cop out. This is for PL only all other genetic conditions our breed is prone to, well work it out by what i've been saying, crickets chirping comes to mind. this is what i found about patellas in american site: Genetics, heritability and interviews with the experts74% of breeders and owners who returned their recent CCA health surveys had one or more dogs affected with luxating patellas. There was an average of almost 3 dogs affected for every one survey returned. In a recent study of small breed dogs in Austria, 76.9% of chihuahuas examined had some degree of luxation4. Luxating patellas are an important health issue that needs to be addressed in our breed. It is imperative that breeders strive to breed sound patellas and the only way to do that is to know the facts and to make responsible choices in breeding programs. Luxating patellas are genetic in origin1, 2, 3. It is easy to rationalize that they are brought on by injury or exercise, but this is very rarely the case. According to Gert Breur, DVM, PhD, DACVS Purdue University and Dr. Rory Todhunter, Cornell University Clinical Sciences professor, If an injury precipitates luxation of the patellas, it is highly likely there was a genetic predisposition to begin with (See full interviews below). As responsible breeders we should not make excuses for breeding dogs with luxating patellas at the expense of the health of our breed's gene pool. They are not easily "bred out" because of their genetic nature. Luxating patellas are polygenic threshold traits1,2. A polygenic trait is one that is produced by multiple genes3. In the case of luxating patellas, the polygenes control the shallowness of the groove in the femur, the development of the guiding bony ridges and the strength or attachment of the ligaments governing movement of the patella. All of these factors are determined polygenically and contribute towards the onset of the defect2. Several genes also influence a threshold trait, but the trait will not be expressed unless a critical number of those genes is present1,2. This means that a totally normal dog may be carrying a very high number of undesirable genes for a trait, but not quite the critical number needed for the trait to be expressed1. Threshold traits develop only when the additive effects of genes exceed this critical number. If a puppy has luxating patellas, he or she inherited the critical number of genes from both parents that were needed to express the trait. If the "magic" number is ten, the puppy could have received four from the dam and six from the sire, or even just one from the dam and nine from the sire. Both parents are not necessarily equally at fault. Dogs or bitches that have any degree of luxating patellas are carrying a higher number of the necessary genes which they will pass onto their offspring. It is not "bred out" if the puppies turn out to be physically normal- phenotypically they may be, but genotypically they may still be much more likely to reproduce luxating patellas. This is why affected Chihuahuas should be removed from breeding programs. Siblings of affected chihuahuas are also at a higher risk and should be monitored and offspring followed up on1. Sires or dams that produce a higher than average number of offspring with luxating patellas should also be removed from breeding programs. According to Robinson, "Family selection is more effective than individual selection in dealing with polygenic anomalies...Family selection is the most effective means of dealing with threshold characters.2" A dog with normal patellas whose dam had luxating patellas will likely be carrying a much higher number of the genes needed to produce luxating patellas than a dog from two normal parents. If a dog with this background is linebred on it may produce an extraordinary number of offspring with luxating patellas even though the dog in question is phenotypically normal. If a dog with this background became a popular sire, it could do irreparable damage to the gene pool. Any dog or bitch with luxating patellas should never be bred. agree, some vets i approached did not want to grade at all, and testing of PL varies from vet to vet its an extremely vague system, thats why i am writing about it and reporting whatever i find to try and help and inform others. as i say, we have come a long way from the days when no one discussed this and if they did, they'd be held accountable. me writing articles and talking about these issues in the open has helped alot particularly new breeders who are more than happy to share information amongst their peers. I have resorted to using a certificate on the back is diagrams and grading info for the vets to follow. it helps to use a vet that is inline with your own thinking. i have devised my own testing procedure and then for clarification i go to my own vet to get formal grades done.

which ones do this? im looking at it from my point of view. we can only test for the ones in breeds that we know that are there. atm there are no schemes going on for PL which is common in toy dogs mainly but can show up in other breeds we are finding out. im talking about diseases/genetic problems like that. im not really saying this, im not saying for judges to turn into vets. im saying if ANKC had a system whereby puppies in order to be registered had to have certain tests done and then recorded somewhere if clear or what scores for PL or HD or whatever, then the judges and other exhibitors and indeed the public can be assured we are all exhibiting healthy dogs. Then that could carry over to breeding it would help tremendously if everyone had the same info so they can make an informed choice as you have said in the past - good idea i can't really disupte that, i would think to myself that would be progress.. yes all this is in the hands of the breeder at the end of the day. To say (some one said it i can't be bothered going back how many pages long this thread is, some breeders only look at champion in the pedigree and mate according to seeing how many in there, some do some don't its not fair to blanket all show breeders doing this and only concerned with champion, as they say i've always said too, being a champion grand champion whatever is no indication of the dog itself, im certainly not dazzled by that title anyway. Some are already using the pedigrees and tracking dogs in pedigrees and mating according to that too. We are all different no one has the same formula, no one thinks the same everyone has had different experiences.

no i meant test for known and common genetic problems within a breed to make sure they are healthy examples before they enter the showring. that would be ability and there would be other areas to test all that out some clubs hold not only confirmation shows but tracking shows or other sports in conjunction like GR's. the ANKC is not all about dog shows there a whole range of other events for dogs as well.

hence why i said "use to" they did away with it, but i believe they use to be a few years ago.

in some breeds they've started a system whereby the breeders can only register their pups if they carry out certain tests, but im of the opinion and maybe this might end up coming through, that in order to register a litter you would have to conduct tests out on all problems that affect that breed. talking to some breeders about this some are grumbling that its going to cost the earth to get all these tests done and they can't afford it so won't be breeding anymore. ETA: coming from out of the mouths of some that don't believe in testing any stock at all mind you so you can lead a horse to water but sometimes cannot force them to drink. lol so another nail in the coffin and shooing breeders away but how else can we ensure that we are breeding and showing healthy examples of each breed? i believe that HD scores use to be logged onto pedigrees? tell me if i am wrong. but i said a long time ago that i'd like to see PL scores logged the same way. it would help alot.

I only saw the show once and have no intention of looking at it again to check, but it did not strick me that they were expecting the judges to know that dog had SM. What I got out of it was that the breeder kept showing the dog and breeding the dog after she knew it was sick. I recently read it had several more litters after PDE was aired too. However I think judges do not take notice of health problems that they can see in the ring and will still award the dogs. Maybe everyone is so used to seeing it that they no longer think of it as a problem? Like this dogs eyes, who won it's class at Cruffs this year. hmmm doesn't look too good. you'd think after all this publicity with the KC in UK about what they are doing and not doing, they'd take a bit more care, this only adds to the debate. i can't look at that dogs eyes.

I only saw the show once and have no intention of looking at it again to check, but it did not strick me that they were expecting the judges to know that dog had SM. What I got out of it was that the breeder kept showing the dog and breeding the dog after she knew it was sick. I recently read it had several more litters after PDE was aired too. However I think judges do not take notice of health problems that they can see in the ring and will still award the dogs. Maybe everyone is so used to seeing it that they no longer think of it as a problem? Like this dogs eyes, who won it's class at Cruffs this year. but what i took exception to was becuase a few breeders decided to do that to their animals and breed in a genetic problem ALL BREEDERS are like this. that what i take exception to, becasue they showed one animal with a genetic problem it means ALL OF THE BREED is like this too. Becuase they showed one club with breeders who don't listen when they have a big problem it means all of us are like this. i mean i don't do it, i refuse to, i try and breed healthy animals that are a pleasure to own whether show or pet because i believe it is cruel and i have a duty to my breed and also with my animals. there are alot of friends that are breeders who have the same beliefs as me. no as i said, some judges don't award dogs who they can see and everyone else have health problems it depends on the judge who is judging but its not for them to say to the person you cannot enter your dog. all they can do is say no award and then quickly the owners come up (seen this) and ask all offended why the dog has been ordered out of the ring? some people cannot see their dogs are sick and telling them so does no good. but thats up to the individual person or people - why do we all have to be made accountable for the idiots who continue to breed diseased dogs and obvioulsy have no concience or ethics and no care towards their poor dogs. just care about themselves and bugger the breeds future.

no need to jump all over you. I agree that is a very good idea and hopefully it may work. it all depends on how many breeders or pet owners for instance, log patella scores. I've been stating this very thing since i started research into this genetic problem for many years. I would love to see some sort of a recording registry going on so we can all use the information to our own advantages. but by the same token if you are any kind of a caring ethical breeder, you'd be doing your own recording system yourself. i.e. tracking dogs you bred their patella scores jotting it down, on limit as a pet or not it makes no difference. Well i do that anyway! its the only defence i have against this genetic problem. but there are so many not doing this, don't care not interested its not funny. i once did up a patella certificate and presented it to a few clubs to ask if breeders would be intersted in using them to grade their dogs and have some sort of a recording system. do you know i only got 2 people interested. i continue to do this on my own. so thats very good what you are proposing there, im all for it. i just hope that many will want to use it judging by the response i got........yeah. But you see as it stands in order for people to access that really important info that you have on dogs in your lines its been reliant of word of mouth or you offering it to a select group and them seeing it as important as what it is .Some breeders have even told lies in order for it all to be kept secret. If its entered onto a system which everyone can access when they come to profiling their pedigrees then it can be used for the true betterment of the breed by everyone. We can see patterns on a much wider base line and the info is avilable for ever not just while you are around. the reason we have invited those who have limited register dogs etc to add the info is because we know that if we only rely on breeders we wont have enough info to do what the system is capable of. but for us this is a preferable method of tracking genetic or heritable issues in dogs we breed. We tried surveys and found that many breeders tell lies and so that info is not reliable and we look at the system propsed by Sydney uni and its not going to tell any stories about the dogs WE breed so for us this is the best we can see for our breeds into the future. yes, you are 100% right, as my brother quoted and he is not in the dogworld at all, just has two GR's as pets that a purebred one is a reg. pedigree and one is a rescue from a puppy farm found wandering down a busy road one day - he said, it seems to him the systems they have in place in the purebred registry is one big honor system. lol and i can't really dispute that. IT IS. and yes, at times i've come across big secrets but i believe and many now believe its time to start being honest with each other and themselves and it seems to be getting through TO SOME EXTENT but we still have a long way to go. this is why when i first came out and stated based on my experience 6-7 years ago that PL is very rampant in some toy breeds simply because not enough of us are honest with ourselves and each other, that caused quite a stir!! Yes but being honest with only a selective few rather than for everyone who comes behind us for ever is a long way apart. I believe that the pedigree system if used correctly is the very best tool we will ever have to be able to select breeding dogs which are for the true betterment of the breed - where show dogs and working dogs and sick dogs and healthy dogs can all be considered when we select. im going to have to agree with you again there, i proposed that maybe we should have some sort of a registry for everyone not just a few. but i could only target a few that were listening the rest preferred to sadly, spread rumours that i was out to get whoever. could not do it alone, so having a whole organisation that pushes for this might have a better outcome, as the ANKC and controlling body were not interested in my proposal i couldn't even get anyone to talk to me i'll be honest.

i don't know, yes its true you wouldn't be able to tell the really bad ones would be itching and doing other things infront of whoever, the mild ones would not show much. Even PL the low grades sometimes you cannot tell by just viewing so some judges the good ones will get a dog on the table and actually outstretch the joints and feel for it. i think they should come out and explain themselves a bit better really, they've only made themselves and all of us look silly. RSPCA here has gone directly to ANKC as i see on their website they're answering them on there, but really who reads that stuff only breeders, judges and already the converted. so infact i believe they're talking into their pillow. not getting to the wider audience the public. how much RSPCA has taken note of what ANKC has said to answer PDE i don't know but it seems they are still stuck with the same record, i.e. all pedigree dogs are unhealthy and inbred and we need to do something about it. i think its turning the public to the unwarranted and untested theory cross breeds are more healthier so we'll by pass the pedigree purebred.

no need to jump all over you. I agree that is a very good idea and hopefully it may work. it all depends on how many breeders or pet owners for instance, log patella scores. I've been stating this very thing since i started research into this genetic problem for many years. I would love to see some sort of a recording registry going on so we can all use the information to our own advantages. but by the same token if you are any kind of a caring ethical breeder, you'd be doing your own recording system yourself. i.e. tracking dogs you bred their patella scores jotting it down, on limit as a pet or not it makes no difference. Well i do that anyway! its the only defence i have against this genetic problem. but there are so many not doing this, don't care not interested its not funny. i once did up a patella certificate and presented it to a few clubs to ask if breeders would be intersted in using them to grade their dogs and have some sort of a recording system. do you know i only got 2 people interested. i continue to do this on my own. so thats very good what you are proposing there, im all for it. i just hope that many will want to use it judging by the response i got........yeah. But you see as it stands in order for people to access that really important info that you have on dogs in your lines its been reliant of word of mouth or you offering it to a select group and them seeing it as important as what it is .Some breeders have even told lies in order for it all to be kept secret. If its entered onto a system which everyone can access when they come to profiling their pedigrees then it can be used for the true betterment of the breed by everyone. We can see patterns on a much wider base line and the info is avilable for ever not just while you are around. the reason we have invited those who have limited register dogs etc to add the info is because we know that if we only rely on breeders we wont have enough info to do what the system is capable of. but for us this is a preferable method of tracking genetic or heritable issues in dogs we breed. We tried surveys and found that many breeders tell lies and so that info is not reliable and we look at the system propsed by Sydney uni and its not going to tell any stories about the dogs WE breed so for us this is the best we can see for our breeds into the future. yes, you are 100% right, as my brother quoted and he is not in the dogworld at all, just has two GR's as pets that are purebred one is a reg. pedigree and one is a rescue from a puppy farm found wandering down a busy road one day - he said, it seems to him the systems they have in place in the purebred registry is one big honor system. lol and i can't really dispute that. IT IS. and yes, at times i've come across big secrets but i believe and many now believe its time to start being honest with each other and themselves and it seems to be getting through TO SOME EXTENT but we still have a long way to go. this is why when i first came out and stated based on my experience 6-7 years ago that PL is very rampant in some toy breeds simply because not enough of us are honest with ourselves and each other, that caused quite a stir!!

no need to jump all over you. I agree that is a very good idea and hopefully it may work. it all depends on how many breeders or pet owners for instance, log patella scores. I've been stating this very thing since i started research into this genetic problem for many years. I would love to see some sort of a recording registry going on so we can all use the information to our own advantages. but by the same token if you are any kind of a caring ethical breeder, you'd be doing your own recording system yourself. i.e. tracking dogs you bred their patella scores jotting it down, on limit as a pet or not it makes no difference. Well i do that anyway! its the only defence i have against this genetic problem. but there are so many not doing this, don't care not interested its not funny. i once did up a patella certificate and presented it to a few clubs to ask if breeders would be intersted in using them to grade their dogs and have some sort of a recording system. do you know i only got 2 people interested. i continue to do this on my own. so thats very good what you are proposing there, im all for it. i just hope that many will want to use it judging by the response i got........yeah.

steve i styled my post like that because i was talking to you all. i was unaware that MDBA attributed the same recognised system as ANKC to developing breeds. that has answered my question thank you. and no i don't have a problem with it at all. i recently was looking at how they develop a new breed for a freind that has a developing breed herself in Australia here. ANKC do let the developing breed clubs work it out themselves and yes i agree there could be health issues come up and it would be nice if ANKC had a more hands on approach to help them out.

omg, this thread has really deviated from the original statement. am i to understand that MDBA has sights to be a registry for dogs to rival ANKC registry? and you will take developing breeds? what sort of developing breeds? im reading all comments, but i'd have to disagree with this comment if you don't have some sort of guide with breeds how will we know what to measure up with? if we end dog shows we end the pedigree dog simple as that. i don't think dog shows will ever fade away somehow sorry to disappoint you all. so have you ever shown dogs?? i've been showing dogs since 1986 and have seen my fair share of good and bad its like anything in life there are good and there are bad, i've seen dogs thrown out of the ring because of lameness or suffering from genetic conditions, it does happen, you have to remember that like breeders with different ethics and beliefs so too are judges. Some judges judge for soundness and overall health others may not. you get a feel for what judges prefer what, some judges may like a certain type within a breed and go with that there are many variables inbetween. but to say a blanket statement that dogs shows are only there for appearance only and forget everything else is not really fair. we hold up dogs to the standard for appearance AS WELL AS health and ability to reproduce and there are alot of other breeders who do the same thing. if you don't hold up dogs to a breed standard how do you conform a certain breed of dog, if anything goes and there are no dog shows? then you don't have the pedigree dog, its the end..........i don't understand the reasoning behind all of this at all. i mean i agree with some sort of points system or even vetting dogs before they go into the ring to ascertain that they are a healthy specimen before they compete i wouldn't mind betting that some dogs would fall short. Im all for that dealing with my issue that i've talked about on here. but the rest of it, im just like in answer to all this all breed clubs and kennel clubs are different, just because some of you have had a nasty experience with some doesn't mean they are all evil. as i've said before many times our breed club do all those things listed and more. We scout for pet owners and invite them to join our club and they do, we have days for gatherings where breeders answer all questions related to our breed, we have classes in a breed competition where the pet owner even with a desexed dog can show their dog and get a prize for which some of them are over the moon. it gives them great encouragment. and it is good PR for our breed and the evidence is in our members which is booming and numbers are getting bigger and bigger. We talk to our new breeders and help the oldies help them alot. website: we have all relevant info on our breed. we are not the only club. All-breed clubs i've been involved in a few of those and not all are evil, sat on committees, president, assistant secretary, one i singled handedly saved from closing down about 16 years ago all the older people left for other committments as it was just a given they will always run the clubs so i brought in a heap of new people and today this club is going very strong and is still there. i've spoken and associated with breeders of many breeds, Borzois, staffies, italian greyhound, akitas, german sheps to name a few. limit registered dogs utitlised for what? there is a reason why a dog is put onto limit register, mainly because the dog is not a good example or the breeder doesn't want the dog to be used in the gene pool, thats the breeders protection, this is why the ANKC brought it in, in the first place. thats why i desex mine! because it can't be used to be shown or bred doesn't stop it being used outside the system thats why i desex my limits as well. i don't know this has really deviated from the original statement and im really surprised at some comments . i believe myself the current system works just fine it has been working just fine for hundreds of years, its up to the individual, there's different views, different attitudes, different ethics and thats how human nature is.

Which breeds in your opinion have changed Marion1? I have been showing dogs for 35 years and yes I could name one specific breed(that we used to own) that in my opinion has changed in size as such,ie, has gotten smaller in size over the years, but other than that breeds of 35 years ago look very much like the ones being bred today. There are still good and bad examples of every breed out there now, as there was 35 years ago. There are healthy dogs and unhealthy ones in every breed. And this has been the case for many years. What does change are breeders views and how their interpretations of the standard are applied to the breeds they own. With these differing interpretations, comes differing types of the same breed. Good and bad. If these specimens are shown then it is also the judges interpretation of the standard which may mean that the dog gets awarded or not. I was told many years ago that in each and every breed, you can just about bet good money on the fact that there are some superb examples of each breed sitting somewhere in a persons backyard, that does not get shown. 30 years ago alot of breeders then certainly did not breed just for the money. They bred for the love of the breed, to preserve breed type as close to the standard as possible and to show their stock off to the world. Looking at photos of breeds of dogs 30 years ago or more every breed still had breed type then, as they do now. For without breed type you dont have a breed. If pedigree dogs of today were solely bred just for pets then we would have no need to retain standards, as they would be totally unimportant. In my opinion that would be such a wrong thing to do. Take the likes of the British Bulldog for example. If it wasnt for the advent of dog shows then the BB would of become virtually extinct when the barbaric sport of Bullbaiting became outlawed in 1835. And just for a little bit of history for those who are interested the oldest breed Club in the world is The Bulldog Club Inc. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: im not really getting the joke here??????????????? you must be having a good day steve lol dont panic toy dog its just that steve always thinks my posts are highly amusing. Do I give a damn? nup. It is quite funny actually Do I ? Who are you? Cant say Ive ever noticed you much before - have I ? if so I dont remember you being so funny but surely you were joking??????????? is it possible to elaborate on this???? what parts did you find funny steve? the suspense is killing me here

yes, noticed this with the pomeranian, use to show and breed these about 15-20 years ago, the americans use to heavily trim the coat, now i notice a size difference as well as heavily trimmed when they are supposed to be in their natural form just with a slight trim of feet and maybe pants and around ears for neatness. most people are suprised when i use to tell them that they are trimmed to look like they do in the ring. they don't look like that naturally

thats a different looking cake! yum

yeah? I can't be sure a little bit confused as to the direction of some of the posts Toy dog, go back to the first time I posted it. I posted 2 links, one for the Ad it was used on, for soap and the message was wash your hands otherwise you eat what is on your hands (like your pet dog). Hense the Pug X Whole Meal Loaf. The second was where I saw that pic that very morning and there is also says it is a photoshop job. I also put LOL at the end of what I said to indicate it was meant to be funny. I posted it as the prior post was about modifying dogs and I thought is was a perfect light hearted antidote. well actually if you read one of the first comments they claim it is barely photoshopped and the picture below of a normal pic of a pug is very similar NOT. lol

Which breeds in your opinion have changed Marion1? I have been showing dogs for 35 years and yes I could name one specific breed(that we used to own) that in my opinion has changed in size as such,ie, has gotten smaller in size over the years, but other than that breeds of 35 years ago look very much like the ones being bred today. There are still good and bad examples of every breed out there now, as there was 35 years ago. There are healthy dogs and unhealthy ones in every breed. And this has been the case for many years. What does change are breeders views and how their interpretations of the standard are applied to the breeds they own. With these differing interpretations, comes differing types of the same breed. Good and bad. If these specimens are shown then it is also the judges interpretation of the standard which may mean that the dog gets awarded or not. I was told many years ago that in each and every breed, you can just about bet good money on the fact that there are some superb examples of each breed sitting somewhere in a persons backyard, that does not get shown. 30 years ago alot of breeders then certainly did not breed just for the money. They bred for the love of the breed, to preserve breed type as close to the standard as possible and to show their stock off to the world. Looking at photos of breeds of dogs 30 years ago or more every breed still had breed type then, as they do now. For without breed type you dont have a breed. If pedigree dogs of today were solely bred just for pets then we would have no need to retain standards, as they would be totally unimportant. In my opinion that would be such a wrong thing to do. Take the likes of the British Bulldog for example. If it wasnt for the advent of dog shows then the BB would of become virtually extinct when the barbaric sport of Bullbaiting became outlawed in 1835. And just for a little bit of history for those who are interested the oldest breed Club in the world is The Bulldog Club Inc. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: im not really getting the joke here??????????????? you must be having a good day steve lol dont panic toy dog its just that steve always thinks my posts are highly amusing. Do I give a damn? nup. It is quite funny actually ok

yeah? I can't be sure a little bit confused as to the direction of some of the posts

I don't know what you guys on on about. Breeds are constantly being modified, as long as you can still make out the breed, what is the problem? Here is an example of modified breed I saw this morning.LOL http://www.ibelievei...y-handwash-dog/ http://terriermandot...7/pug-loaf.html Forget that, I would like you to respond to my previous posts regarding bringing in heritable diseases if stud books are opened. Why won't you respond to it? that image has been altered you can tell becuase the front forelegs disappear and you can see extra lines been added on its back as well. I've been mucking around with images and photos for about 15 years now. if that dog was to stand up because the forelegs are so close to the back legs it wouldn't be balanced at all no dog could ever be built like that. The face looks like its been ramped up as well to me. they've altered the image to advertise whatever they're advertising Toy dog- its a loaf of bread. ;) an image of a loaf of breed with the face and body of a pug plastered onto it maybe. doesn't do much to promote the image of the pedigree dog people not that savvy might think, those pedigree breeders have a lot to answer for breeding a dog that looks like that. meanwhile the image has been altered. i dunno maybe im getting to upset.

Which breeds in your opinion have changed Marion1? I have been showing dogs for 35 years and yes I could name one specific breed(that we used to own) that in my opinion has changed in size as such,ie, has gotten smaller in size over the years, but other than that breeds of 35 years ago look very much like the ones being bred today. There are still good and bad examples of every breed out there now, as there was 35 years ago. There are healthy dogs and unhealthy ones in every breed. And this has been the case for many years. What does change are breeders views and how their interpretations of the standard are applied to the breeds they own. With these differing interpretations, comes differing types of the same breed. Good and bad. If these specimens are shown then it is also the judges interpretation of the standard which may mean that the dog gets awarded or not. I was told many years ago that in each and every breed, you can just about bet good money on the fact that there are some superb examples of each breed sitting somewhere in a persons backyard, that does not get shown. 30 years ago alot of breeders then certainly did not breed just for the money. They bred for the love of the breed, to preserve breed type as close to the standard as possible and to show their stock off to the world. Looking at photos of breeds of dogs 30 years ago or more every breed still had breed type then, as they do now. For without breed type you dont have a breed. If pedigree dogs of today were solely bred just for pets then we would have no need to retain standards, as they would be totally unimportant. In my opinion that would be such a wrong thing to do. Take the likes of the British Bulldog for example. If it wasnt for the advent of dog shows then the BB would of become virtually extinct when the barbaric sport of Bullbaiting became outlawed in 1835. And just for a little bit of history for those who are interested the oldest breed Club in the world is The Bulldog Club Inc. excellent post