Does Anyone Read Or Care About This Topic?

[moosmum]

Are you trying to say that crossbreeding should be allowed ?

Because the whole point of having breeds is predictability. I don't want people to be breeding registered crossbreeds and then trying to show them against my registered purebreds? Then who's going to support crossbred shows? Maybe make a different register and system for crossbreeds as they're being bred toward a predictable "breed" but don't muddy it up into actual breeds.

If that's not what you're meaning then I give up.

Thank you.

No, thats not what I mean.

They should be permitted to be bred, BUT:

Cross breeds should NOT be registered - Until and unless they become a recognizable type in demand, With enough following to support a breed club. They don't have to be predictable, As long as there is a purpose. If that purpose leads to a distinct type, with clear value to the purpose, that is how your breeds were formed.

The ability to do that is the foundation on which the K.Cs stand. To not recognize that, is to undermine your own foundations.

Pedigree breeders must have the option to breed dogs that WON'T be eligible for registration. Or showing. Just like every one else who hasn't signed up the the K.Cs constitution. For Biophysical reasons, they can't survive long term with out that.

The SPECIES needs that change to survive. Pedigree dogs are interdependent with breeders who DON'T work under a pedigree system.

When pedigree breeders suffer a blow, so do those who aren't. And It works the other way too. All BECAUSE of that rule.

There needs to be recognition we are serving the same values. That is NOT the pedigree. Its the dogs, for the purpose we find in them.

The pedigree has value as a tool. For its purpose. But it isn't THE purpose. Or else you are serving the pedigree, not the dogs. Any values we have for dogs and how we should be responding to them as a species is dependent on the purpose we as individuals get from the dogs. The pedigree is one way to access and possibly increase the value. Nothing more.

It does not, in reality, divide the species into a value system Vs none, because any value is in the Dogs.

That rule irrevocably divides the environment into two incompatible halves. It sends a message to divide what CAN'T be divided, so the only option is to divide again. And again. And again. Decreasing each time because the only way to put all the value into one environment is to decrease the environment able to hold those values.

We lose our ability to respond to the species in the ONLY way that can see it evolve effectively AS a species.

Under that rule. Take it away, and pedigree breeders AND those not in a breed registry, can BOTH become much more responsible and effective, with pedigree breeders representing the breeds much more effectively and EARNING a favored role in direction. The quality of membership would rise with the quality of the environment they come from.

Against my better judgement I will say this again. I believe that you do not understand the value of the pedigree . Any body breeding any dogs whether they be cross bred, purebred or otherwise can make better breeding decisions if they know the ancestry of the dogs they are breeding .Every single time you use a dog for breeding which you dont know whats in its pedigree there is a greater risk that you will bring puppies into the world which will break someone's heart .Not much point in a dog being a great worker if it develops Degenerative Myelopathy at 6 years and by then it has spread its genetic material to a couple of generations.

I agree with the value of pedigrees and understanding the ancestry of a dog used for breeding. I understand that value better than most, in its broad applications.

Now explain to the general public how this means the K.Cs BOB GSD can meet their needs better. How its a predictably better, less risky purchase.( Crufts 2016)

How ONLY breeding pedigree dogs, with Pedigree dogs has made that so.

Too many people using the pedigree DON'T understand that. Their understanding is that the pedigree makes it a better dog- Not any understanding of how to use it to bring real improvement or purpose to what they are doing. As long as the show scene and their peers bring rewards for that pedigree, its right.

Edited March 26, 2016 by moosmum

[moosmum]

Are you trying to say that crossbreeding should be allowed ?

Because the whole point of having breeds is predictability. I don't want people to be breeding registered crossbreeds and then trying to show them against my registered purebreds? Then who's going to support crossbred shows? Maybe make a different register and system for crossbreeds as they're being bred toward a predictable "breed" but don't muddy it up into actual breeds.

If that's not what you're meaning then I give up.

Thank you.

No, thats not what I mean.

They should be permitted to be bred, BUT:

Cross breeds should NOT be registered - Until and unless they become a recognizable type in demand, With enough following to support a breed club. They don't have to be predictable, As long as there is a purpose. If that purpose leads to a distinct type, with clear value to the purpose, that is how your breeds were formed.

The ability to do that is the foundation on which the K.Cs stand. To not recognize that, is to undermine your own foundations.

Pedigree breeders must have the option to breed dogs that WON'T be eligible for registration. Or showing. Just like every one else who hasn't signed up the the K.Cs constitution. For Biophysical reasons, they can't survive long term with out that.

The SPECIES needs that change to survive. Pedigree dogs are interdependent with breeders who DON'T work under a pedigree system.

When pedigree breeders suffer a blow, so do those who aren't. And It works the other way too. All BECAUSE of that rule.

There needs to be recognition we are serving the same values. That is NOT the pedigree. Its the dogs, for the purpose we find in them.

The pedigree has value as a tool. For its purpose. But it isn't THE purpose. Or else you are serving the pedigree, not the dogs. Any values we have for dogs and how we should be responding to them as a species is dependent on the purpose we as individuals get from the dogs. The pedigree is one way to access and possibly increase the value. Nothing more.

It does not, in reality, divide the species into a value system Vs none, because any value is in the Dogs.

That rule irrevocably divides the environment into two incompatible halves. It sends a message to divide what CAN'T be divided, so the only option is to divide again. And again. And again. Decreasing each time because the only way to put all the value into one environment is to decrease the environment able to hold those values.

We lose our ability to respond to the species in the ONLY way that can see it evolve effectively AS a species.

Under that rule. Take it away, and pedigree breeders AND those not in a breed registry, can BOTH become much more responsible and effective, with pedigree breeders representing the breeds much more effectively and EARNING a favored role in direction. The quality of membership would rise with the quality of the environment they come from.

There is no such thing as a KC which does not have provision for allowing the stud books to be opened and for dogs to be entered which are not already registered with them. Right now in the UK every single breed's stud book is open.

Yes there is a requirement for anyone to wants to use outside dogs to go through a process for permission and show cause as to why a particular dog which is not registered would benefit the breed but this serves the purpose and protects the breed.

A KC may have as part of its rules that you cant breed other dogs if you are one of their members but they cannot restrict what a breeder does with dogs which are not registered as long as they don't breed them to dogs which are registered.

They have 'provisions', yes. But they do not allow 'examples'. How is anyone encouraged to make use of these provisions if examples and possibilities are NOT recognized until after the fact? A person contemplating this has to choose the most effective choices based NOT on any values a particular cross has demonstrated, but only what they can guarantee before the fact?

How are effective examples to be found by a person trying to discover the best choices when known ( healthy ) pedigrees are excluded from those examples he might encounter? It would take a very brave person, supported by a very brave committee and likely a lot more years than a single breeders has to risk to take responsibility for an out cross in the current climate of the K.Cs. And it IS a risk to their standing amongst their peers. Their show careers and even the breed.

If K.C members were permitted to breed good, known dogs INeligible for registration, The choice of dogs used to outcross would be much easier. You aren't making a choice on paper. You have demonstrated values to choose from, not just in breeds, but in individuals. What to choose for an out cross? Lets see, what works? Whats brings most value to the table? Whats AVAILABLE for testing?

They would not BE registered until their worth is demonstrated, so the breed itself is NOT at risk. It remains a pure breed until better value is demonstrated, agreed and enacted by the committee. With less risk because they have demonstrations of value to test and select from.

Edited March 23, 2016 by moosmum

[moosmum]

Personaly, I see no way this will /can be disproved and too many ways it is confirmed. Allowing such rules to stand in any constitution or ideology seems to alter and limit Mans perceptions of reality, science and our own responsibility to that.

We want science based solutions, but can't act on them because we can no longer recognize concepts that were, not so long ago, much better understood. Biological science and evolution is ruled by physics just like every thing else in existence.

Only an understanding of that and the mechanics of those physical laws gives us any ability to respond effectively.

The Science is here. It can explain and provide solutions to the problems the K.Cs have in adapting to the needs and demands of the community to become a success story. Ignoring it because its not understood while trying to address the symptoms is only going to bring further deterioration.

I think dogs have a role to play for recognition of this science that is critical for humanities evolution at this stage of world politics.

Edited March 26, 2016 by moosmum

[moosmum]

Environment is limit.

Purpose and values are a biological response to environment, They over comes limits, to increase environment.

Purpose and value ( response) are NOT inherent to an environment.

The K.Cs are an environment.Purpose and values are not inherent in the standards.

The standards and rules create that environment. They are not a response.

The biological response to the K.C environment must be brought to it, by its membership.

This is impossible while the environment itself governs the identity of its members. If only K.C membership allows a breeder to be recognized AS a breeder.

To demand ADHERENCE TO limitations of your environment( before you can be recognized as a 'breeder') makes those environmental standards your purpose and value. No other purpose or value can be recognized. Only the standards of pedigree.

There will be no change while thats the case. It threaten the memberships identity as breeders to allow any other purpose or value.

Effective change can only be brought to the K.Cs when members longer define the term 'breeder' by the limitations imposed on their own membership.

Until then, all any of us can do as breeders, is eliminate anything that does not fit into this image of self identity.

It IS just an image.

Any one who breeds dogs is a breeder and there can be no purpose or value in that for a dogs natural environment ( the communities of man ) while a K.C environment claims the only legitimate purpose or value.

That K.C environment must discount a belief in dogs to create a belief in the limitations of standards and pedigrees.

The K.Cs are doomed if they keep insisting the limitations of their own environment are what gives a breeder ( or a dog) a valid identity.

Your identity as breeders can NOT be the environment you choose to work in. Only an identity independent in its environment can allow the response needed to bring value and purpose to it.

Nothing wrong with predictability of breed ( or environment) but to demand nothing else forces an endless culling and intolerance of what we can't predict (or 'recognize' as part of the 'standard' environment) Through enforcement of standards that reduce an ability to respond any other way. Shrinking the environment by standardization of its conditions.

You don't recognize dogs as part of a canine species if you state that you don't recognize DOGS bred with out adherance to a pedigree standard and protocols- If only some are recognized.

If your purpose is dogs, you must recognize the species- not just breeds.

'Breed' excludes the diversity and adaptabilty of a species to its environment.

'Breed' is bound to limitation of 'standard' environments where species is not. Species is bound only by the limitations of the responses available TO its environment.

My explanations aren't the problem. Or not all of it any way.

Its a whole new way of looking at things. Of perception. It needs thought to make the shift.

We have the cart dragging the horse.

Edited December 23, 2016 by moosmum

[moosmum]

The K.cs don't have to accept any thing they don't want want to include.

They must recognize it though, if its a dog and they claim to be for dogs and not just pedigrees for their own sake, exclusive of dogs.

A species diversity allows it a range of response that gives it adaptability to change and challenge. A species ability to respond governs how it evolves to meet those challenges and changes.

A Breed doesn't hold the diversity of its species. Its ability to respond is limited to its condition(s) as a breed, in a specialized and isolated environment.

If you will only recognize set 'types' of the species, You aren't just favoring the predictability of 'breeds'. You'd have a right to do that. As people who give a place to dogs you will favor the ones that bring value to the environment YOU provide.

But if you won't recognize the species, you exclude the diversity inherent to it, and the people and conditions that keep them. You exclude response beyond recognized conditions.

You will only recognize limitations- of isolated, fixed and restrictive conditions for predictable types, with out ability to respond other wise.

The conditions that distinguish 'type' from species.

That is not for dogs. Thats for 'conditions' that bring predictable results. Thats antidiversity.

Dogs won't survive as if those conditions are imposed on the species. Thats what happens while the species isn't recognized.

Conditions are imposed to have breeds. Thats O.K.IF we recognize the SPECIES for its diversity of response to meet the demands of any conditions it needs to overcome.

Breeds will always be limited to the conditions that give them a distinct identity.Even when that condition deteriorates.

That won't change with out recognition of the species beyond breed.

The Dogs ACT site in its opening statement makes that declaration. No doubt many affiliated orgs. do.

That we accept the conditions of breed limitation, but not recognize the diverse responses of a species to its human environment.

The message the species sends to its environment- is that diversity of species is unacceptable. We refuse to recognize it as a species.

Only divided into precise but entirely separate components with nothing in common. There is no entire purpose.Only pieces held apart.

Yet if you need to look at the condition of the species, you need to put the pieces together to see if how it works.It won't work if theres no purpose to hold it together.You are missing the nuts and bolts.

There can't be a species. Only predictable, recognizable component conditions for one with nothing in common to give the species purpose or adaptability to its condition. A kind of chaos.

A dogs purpose is to respond to the conditions of humanity in ways that improve those conditions. Humanity is the dogs environment. Its increased when more people see and recognize the value in keeping dogs. For what it does for the human condition, a dog improves his own. The species has response-ability to its environment, to shape its condition through how it responds.

A breeds 'purpose' is to restrict its responses to the conditions of its identity as a breed. At least while nothing else can be recognized. The value Humans see and recognize in the breed depends on what value they find in its condition, as it is now. A breed has no response-ability to its environment or condition. It depends on the supporting conditions remaining unchanged. They don't and won't.

A breeds identity can only evolve, respond and change if theres recognition that its species condition is never static. Its condition will change (and has).

The responses to the changed conditions can't come from its condition?!

It can only come with a response independent of its condition.

From its purpose to its condition.

With out recognition of the species condition, response isn't possible from a breed.

The environment is forced to respond to the breeds. Thats beyond the ability of environment. Thats not the in the nature of environment. Environment demands. It doesn't respond. Identities respond to demands. If they can't, the available conditions are reduced.

Pugs can't breathe? We reduce the Pugs to those who can, but won't alter their conditions to enable better breathing. We wouldn't recognize a Pug if we did. Because its his condition we recognize. Not its abilities of response to our demands to breathe.

His purpose is to fit into the standard conditions of his being.

We can't address the condition of a Pug if its only its condition that gives it a recognizable identity.

Humanity has its own environment. The K.Cs formed an identity, of common response to an aspect of their environment. Dogs.

That was a positive move that could have promoted faster and better responses from the canine species. Through demonstration of the benefits and values it contributes to the purpose of dogs.

But their statement of purpose included the instruction that the environment inhabited by that collective identity would recognize no other condition. No environment or purpose beyond the pedigree condition. They state they do not recognize a species, only their own conditions. They promote a demand, that only a dogs 'conditions' give him purpose and value.

Reality is, a dogs ability to respond to his condition, and how it does, decides if there is any purpose. Environment demands that response be adaptable to any conditions of the species environment, or those conditions/environments are lost to it. They serve no purpose in those conditions with out responding to them.

The K.Cs are to maintain the conditions of breed group identities and response, into standard, static environments. Without recognition of other states

the conditions a C.C member can respond to are limited to those conditions alone. Their environment and its conditions are self contained in the body of an organization bound by common purpose. Its Exclusive of any other purpose. Its members gives up autonomy of response. They have an over riding member identity, whos purpose is its 'self'. NOT Dogs. Its purpose is to 'set' and limit Canine Conditions

The statement of non-recognition removes "The purpose of" the pedigree system to a dogs condition,

to make the "Pedigree system" the purpose for a dogs condition.

The dog is no longer the purpose of the K.Cs. The conditions are.

Recognize the species and a pedigree system can benefit the dogs, even the ones that system doesn't actualy accept. Because with out recognition, there is nothing to accept but conditions. Without response-ability, any conditions will be unacceptable sooner or later. Grey hound racing, pet stores, puppy farms , BYBers, Pugs, G.S.Ds AND K.Cs. Because we don't demonstrate responses that work IN those environments to continue providing value. We hold those environments responsible for the lack of value to be found, when the environment HAS no ability to respond. Only to demand we live up to its expectations of us. The environment can only demand or 'expect' what is demonstrated as possibility.

C.C.s making the statement they do not recognize mixes between pure breeds turn the response of pedigrees (to improve practices), to a condition of its environment.

A cultural instruction as much as any gentic instruction to a culture of cells in the body they inhabit.

Its a faulty code in the programing of cultural behaviour.

It removes communication between the cell culture and its environment. The cell culture acting as if its independent of its host, taking what it needs, but not serving the common purpose that will allow survival.

By each cell responding to its conditions independently, as far as its genetic variability or diversity allows.

Improved response by a single cell has the ability to improve response in other cells by an exchange of information. An improvement in a cells response over those around it is replicated. Cells with the improved ability won't suffer the same rate of attrition as long as those conditions hold. They can replace those cells with less ability to recognize and respond to conditions, giving greater resistance in future to similar conditions.

Under that statement of non -recognition: You are cells. You don't recognize the 'body' of the canine species or its purpose. You have created a different body whos purpose is not the good of the body you are contained in. Simply because it can't recognize any more than its own small part in the purpose.

Your C.C creation is a part of a bigger body. It won't exist long with out recognition of that fact or it serves NO purpose but its own. And that is in conflict with the responses required to ensure the health of the body.

Those C.Cs found a response to improve the condition of dogs, and removed it by making it the condition of their being. Their identity. A record of Pedigree.

All dogs have a pedigree. The recording of it isn't what makes it a good dog or a bad dog. Its the response behind it that does.

The recording itself can't be made to apply to all dogs before their value is recognized, because its NOT the measure of the dogs value. Its not possible to apply to all other conditions of dog. Not until every condition fits a 'standardized' classification and we don't expect anything more from them.

The purpose for Pedigrees is lost with an imperetive to restrict the culture to that purpose, and not the dogs pedigrees should benefit.

Edited January 1, 2017 by moosmum

[ricey]

Hi MM & Steve,

I have been away for a while but I am glad to see that the debate continues. I have to say that some (not all) American Pit Bull Terriers have the most carefully recorded pedigrees of any breed. Recorded pedigrees make a dog somewhat predictable. Personally, I believe that the debate should be about performance breed standards versus conformation breed standards.

 

Whoops! perhaps I should crawl back under the rock I have been hiding under for the last two years.........

 

Cheers,

 

ricey

[moosmum]

Hi Ricey, Good to see you back.

 

I agree.

Environmental selection, basicaly. The dogs best suited to the environment they are going to, and their purpose  in it.

Or tested is as similar an environment as they are being chosen to enter.

 The show ring is fine, for those who want to show. It can't cover all purposes and I think thats where the K.Cs let breeders and the dogs down.

 It seems to foster a belief function must follow form.