The future of ANKC breeds

[asal]

As this is a purebred dog forum.  What are your thoughts to this subject?

 

reading this rises a very valid problem our breeds are facing.

 

"I mentioned how my dogs live because it used to irk me *a lot* when l was breeding Maltese a certain fellow Maltese breeder first name Jan, used to delight in telling everyone who would listen that l was a Puppy Farmer.
This was apparently because l only showed my Malts once a year at the Royal.
My Malts had free run of the house, not penned all day, and all of them slept on my bed.
I still have my very first Maltese, she is 15 now and still going strong. She produced 4 beautiful litters for me, containing 4, 4, 4 and 5 puppies, the pups all went to very grateful pet homes. Grateful to be able to buy quality pets from a reputable breeder.
It saddens me enormously that some people in the the dog world can't embrace the thought of us breeding simply to produce pet puppies.
There is such an enormous market for them, and by not meeting that demand, we have allowed the oodle farmers to pick up those sales."

 

When did it become a problem that members who breed pets were discouraged?

 

The ANKC historically IS a register for pure bred dogs.... not SHOW dogs only!

The shift to exclusivity to if you do not show, your a puppy farmer. Has done nothing good for the purebred dog.

 

It has been pet owners deciding they love their breed and become members and register a prefix which is what keeps the gene pool and the ANKC GOING.

 

you only need to read the stats in the "Forensic view of Puppy Breeding In Australia 2017" then compare the continual falling figures from 1990's to today to reinforce the pure bred gene pool is reaching unsustainable level.

 

The cause? the vilification of anyone who does not proudly state they only breed to show.

 

put purebred puppies out of the reach of the people who historically were our future ANKC members and this is the inevitable result....

 

When will the ANKC WAKE up and address this?

 

A dead end kennel is nothing to be proud of. But this is what is being touted as the epitome of ethical responsible?

Toe the imaginary line or risk being attacked  by a self appointed thought policer.

 

Is it true that the British ANKC is classifying unregistered dogs for grading up to increase genetic diversity and numbers for failing breed numbers?

I know this was done here for the Stumpy Tailed Cattledog. because the dead end kennel mentality had them down to only one registered breeder.

 

If the members do not start addressing this who will?

 

Just one example :-

. 1988 -- 2,018 Maltese puppies registered....

2019 -- 198 Maltese puppies registered

 

Google ANKC National Registration Statistics, for your breed of interest.

 

Considering the enormous population growth no wonder there is a huge growth in non ANKC people breeding to meet this market with subsequent loss of potential members. Let alone the gene pool lost.

 

http://ankc.org.au/media/6598/a-forensic-view-of-puppy-breeding-in-australiav4.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

or how many prefer the adopt dont shop?

 

Wonder how long before if you want a dog you need to plan ahead to have your old dog cloned before its too late, like Barbara Streisand?

 

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/02/style/barbra-streisand-cloned-her-dog.html

 

 

wonder if the clone is from an ANKC purebred, if down the track we can just register the clones as well?

 

Edited August 28, 2020 by asal

[moosmum]

An extension of the same is the 'solution' of spey and neuter to address welfare problems like  dogs ending up in pounds and rescue or poorly bred.

If the problem is that dogs can procreate, there is only one way that can end.

 

So why do we treat that as the source of the problem?

 

I am looking for a dog. Found a pup in rescue that sounded promising but  pounds and rescue are not a source I can access- because I choose to decide if and when a dog I am responsible for will be rendered sterile.

And my fences are not 6 foot colour bond.

My dogs do not leave the yard with out me, or wander. They are trained.

I do not have unwanted or uncalled for litters. They are managed.

Entire or sterile can have bearing on their effectiveness and reliability to their purpose that only I am in a position to assess, based on the dog in front of me.

 

How do you assess an immature pups fitness, abilities  or potential with out testing those things in the environment it  will live in? What is that making of the dogs that do go on to breed? What and whos environment are they being assessed for?

Again, it seems the 'design' of the dog takes precedence, not reliability or effectiveness of the dog. Not its ability of response or value to the environments it might live in.

 

I don't think most breeders, let alone the general public have a clue what potential is being lost. Or what has already gone...... they have never seen it and we can only base our expectations on what we know.

 

The blurb on the pup I thought interesting mentioned his potential with the right handler- Seems he doesn't have much after all if those qualities could not possibly be worth expanding on in the right hands, and he can't be expected to learn boundaries.

 

They should have said 'Great potential, but  limited  to our low expectations of anyones ability to bring it out..

 

 

Edited August 28, 2020 by moosmum

[asal]

My friend made a suggestion as for what is the true definition of a puppy farmer.

 

"Leonie 

I say puppies farmers are the ones who cross breed (mongrels) not registered purebred."

 

Why has no one suggested this before?

 

All the people hounded out over the decades, accused of being puppy farmers because they didn't show, or produced more litters than the thought police thought acceptable... even though not one of these people had breached the code of ethics, incidentally

 

We who have watched this bullying over the decades and said nothing.   Have let these bullies get louder and more savage.

 

My vet has bet me that the ANKC will be insolvent within ten years along with the majority of pedigree dogs extinct.

 

without members ceasing this never ending purging of anyone they dont like, cease making it hard to impossible to get a main register pup, let along register a prefix he will be right.

 

.

 

 

Edited August 28, 2020 by asal

[sandgrubber]

47 minutes ago, asal said:

Leonie 

I say puppies farmers are the ones who cross breed (mongrels) not registered purebred."

I disagree.  There are many reasons for cross breeding, and I would be quite happy going back to the days before stud books were closed and the dog fancy was open to the notion of creating new breeds. 

In the past, as a Labrador person in WA, I could see reason to experiment with cross breeding to try and develop a breed that had Labrador temperament and looks, but was not burdened with a coat totally inappropriate for a hot, arid climate. (Of course I would never have dared to do it). I fully understand crosses like the 'puggle' that attempt to capture the traits that make pugs so loveable but get rid of the problems of brachycephaly.  Or the rat terrier, bred for ratting. Nor can I condemn Guide Dogs for experimenting with Lab x Goldens. 

Many existing breeds were established out of deliberate mixing of breeds or land races.  

To me the term 'puppy farmer' should be reserved for people who, as the words suggest, view dogs as livestock and puppies as a crop. 

As for not registering, with the 'fancy' getting all snotty about not selling on main register and looking down on people who breed so they can share their breed with families wanting pets... I can see lots of reasons not to register.  Especially as genetic testing is advancing to a point where it can give better guidance about avoiding the pitfalls of inbreeding than pedigree based indices such as the COI. 

[moosmum]

6 hours ago, asal said:

 

 

"Leonie 

I say puppies farmers are the ones who cross breed (mongrels) not registered purebred."

 

Why has no one suggested this before?

 

 

 

It would be a mistake. The same one made originally by the Kennel club and ANKC.

 

A dog breeder is some one who breeds dogs. Full stop.

Its not an 'Identity'.

Its a practice.

 A thing people do. A direction. To a purpose. The purpose and the value is a Dog.

To define a breeder by any other measure than breeding dogs implies an  inherent 'character' or identity to what is an activity. That can't be done with out limiting and defining the conditions able to support that activity.  Endlessly. Because an identity has inherent characteristics that must remain stable in an unstable environment to be recognisable. And is in entropy because of that. An identity has margins it can't step beyond or include. 

 

Trying to characterise breeders is the mistake the Kennel club made, and that has been 'inherited by  ANKC.

As long as there are breeders there will be good and bad.

 

Like Sandgrubber,  I think the difference is a good breeders purpose is to the dogs they produce. A poor breeders purpose is to some thing else. A different  value. Money, prestige etc.

 

An idea from another thread to put it another way....

A good breeder should aim for a dog able to live as close to its own physical and mental 'nature' as it can to be accepted with open arms.

To offer not just whats acceptable, but sought after, by its own nature .

In the world we have now. Not the world you demand or think they deserve.

Edited August 28, 2020 by moosmum

[asal]

so do you mean ALL breeders are puppy farmers as in the derogatory sense that the thought police are determined to eliminate?

[asal]

 

If Richard my vet is right we have less than ten years to stop the ankc becoming insolvent....

 

 

I know my friends who are 20 year or over members are concerned he may be right... Am surprised to day to learn younger members are beginning to wonder the same... but watching the boat go over the fall without trying to prevent it is not going to do our dogs any good for the future of the breeds is it?

The silent majority have been silent too long assuming all will work out in the end...

 

Hopefully it will, but what if it doesn’t ?

 

It is very hard to stand up to the bullies. I know from painful experience. But turning the other cheek by so many is what has got us to this point.

 

 

The bullies who accuse any who do not comply with their unwritten code of practice version... ie never breed except for a new show pup, never breed more than 1 or at most two litters from your bitch, for example.................... (which is NOT the actual Official Code of Practice to be found on the individual ANKC state branch sites)  have had their way too long.

 

At least you can respect the self appointed thought police ones who voice their opinion with their name to it in writing or to your face even though it is very hurtful and humiliating

 

The slinkers, say nothing to your face, they quietly dial the rspca, animal welfare and your local council and make complaints about your dogs welfare, to the council, they are barking, even though they live on the other side of the state.

 

The slinkers keep it up until if they get lucky a narky rspca inspector uses the opportunity to seize your dog or dogs in hope of a conviction and free press to bring in a windfall of donations.

 

 Even if they do not charge you and return your dog or dogs, the slinkers keep up the "where there’s smoke there's fire' in hopes the target will be so traumatised they give up their dogs and membership...

Have good reason to do so, has been pretty successful 

 

AS for winning the jackpot and the target is charged and usually pleads guilty if they don’t want to lose their home and all they own to the solicitors fees., then they gleefully report the target to the ankc to have their membership cancelled..

 

At least the latest who pointed the gun and fired at me, did it with her name on what she said.

Interesting two called her out for doing it. (Was targeted on a face plant forum yesterday.)

 

No one would have before, so a few are getting tired of the witch hunting of fellow members.

 

Perhaps is an encouraging sign maybe now is the time to call for changes before it’s too late ?

 

 

Perhaps, It is about time the ANKC’s banned members from accusing fellow members of being puppy farmers.. let alone continue the practice of bullying fellow members to resign because the self appointed bullies decide they are not complying with their idea of the code of ethics. Despite the fact the targeted member is complying with the code of ethics as published by the ANKC of their state!

 

 

Come to think of it, cant enforce that idea anyway. otherwise will still continue to lose members who then feel THEIR rights have been infringed.????????????

 

Well, time to pull up a chair, break out the popcorn and chips and see how the movie ends

 

 

IF Richard IS RIGHT, we dont have long to wait .

 

YIKES!   Night all.

 

Edited August 28, 2020 by asal

[moosmum]

2 hours ago, asal said:

so do you mean ALL breeders are puppy farmers as in the derogatory sense that the thought police are determined to eliminate?

Not at all. 

 

But characterising a breeder by anything other than the purpose or action of a breeder ( breeds dogs) will guarantee that at some point in time, sooner or later they will be seen that way. Because its the only resource an identity has to maintain the margins or lines drawn by its characterisation.

 

Its inevitable in the face of external conditions that must be met, once a characterisation or identity is agreed. It shifts responsibility from meeting the needs of an environment that will be supportive and accepting of breeders,   to maintainance of the characterisation, or breeder identity.  

 

We no longer consider ourselves part of the environment or world we are given. We've drawn a different, smaller margin to distinguish ourselves as part of something 'better" than that.We are not.We are all part of it. We are it. Responsible for its conditions and what they might come to support. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 28, 2020 by moosmum

[asal]

Good point, pity there is a cohort that see themselves as the guardians who need to make moves to drive members to resign 

 

To thus incrementally reduce the number of ankc dogs as their dogs are then lost to the registry, ditto for the pups no longer bred because those who remain are afraid to draw attention to themselves if they breed more than 1 or two litters. 

 

The self appointed guardians scan every litter registration in the news letter and get busy dialing once a kennel name has appeared more often than they deem acceptable...  even though there is nothing in the code of ethics restricting a member from having multiple dogs or breeding litters from them.

 

Being a member of your breed club does not keep you safe, not even showing and winning will keep you safe, not even being an active committee member helping to run shows will keep you safe from the Thought Police Guardians as myself and friends have found the hard way.

 

I found it very illuminating when  the person who intimated I was a puppy farmer and thus by inference anything I said was suspect. (the subject was puppy deaths after vaccination, so why the need to attack is beyond my understanding? }

 

when I suggested she too could be called out as a puppy farmer as her facility although state of the art and beautiful, It also meant her dogs are not kept and bred in her home, exactly why a friend was called a puppy farmer by the cohort who believe anyone who does not rise their puppies in their home is a puppy farmer.

Her reaction went skitso.  Demanded I delete what I had said (I didn't ask her to delete what she said to me?)

She said my words had "left a bad taste in her mouth"  "destroyed her pleasure in sharing her photos" 

 

Well hello pet isn't that just what you did to me?

So? she felt so badly by my words, yet she had no hesitation in saying what she had now shown she intended me to feel as badly as she was now complaining about?

All I was trying to point out, there is the unfortunate fact there is always some who looks at you and thinks you are not within their acceptable parameter.

 

Even though you most certainly are within the ANKC Code of ethics.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 28, 2020 by asal

[asal]

Just spotted this posted on face plant.   exactly what that faceplanter showed me about herself yesterday....

 

Pity so many feel the need to discriminate anyone

 

 

 

 

Alyce Comer

19 June

Let this sink in, and if it doesn’t, read it over and over until it does.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 29, 2020 by asal

[moosmum]

I agree with the sentiment of treating others as you would wish to be treated. 

I don't agree with politicising race. It does the same thing in characterising a human condition by some thing beyond the condition itself.

 

Causes the problem its claiming to combat.  By making it part of an entity divided from its environment by its characterisation. To be accepted as part of that entity, I have to agree to my oppression and division from my  human environment. My marginalisation.

a person has to agree to the characterisation regardless of external conditions they may face individually. 

 

ie. I find it very patronising to be considered part of an oppressed miniority who is owed  extra help, because what I was born with can not possibly be good enough to be equal without that. And if I dissent from that identification, I am no longer a valid representative of my own conditions. So will be marginalised.

What would have been the reaction if I had stood up?!

If black, Not representative of the accepted narative or characterisation and marginalised for that!. If white, held up as an example of racism for refusing to recognise my privilege. Further marginalised either way.  Theres no unity or equality in that. Ever.t  The differences are insurmountable.

Racism doesn't combat racism. It breeds it under the guise of virtue.

My character can not be defined by any single condition I have. I  deal with a diversity conditions. Far too many for anyone to define what I am by any one of them.

 

If the word Woman for instance, comes to include the oppression of women in how its used, doesn't that change the way I'm going to be seen and treated?

Rather oppressive to my mind, to be viewed as an object deserving of sympathy and 'special' treatment.

 

Ahh the bigotry of low expectation.

 

Its not just language. Its encompasses reality and physics in order to express them, and instruct, so that we can respond.

If there is going to be a human identity worth working for, its conditions have to be recognised for what they are.

What they are Not,  is irrelevant!

 

 

Edited August 30, 2020 by moosmum

[sandgrubber]

IMO the direction of the future is to skip registries and just ensure that sire and dam aren't closely related or don't have common deleterious recessive genes.  If it looks and acts like a purebred and isn't highly inbred or genetically cursed, that's good enough for me.  

I'm impressed to see that the genetic laboratories are moving in the direction of screening sire and dam together and red flagging possible doubling of deleterious recessive, plus giving reading on degree of inbreeding directly from DNA.  The pedigree based COI is frustrating because it tends to stop at 5 or 6 generations and problems often originate much further back, with the legendary peripotent sire of 30+ years ago. 

 

Not sure we're there yet, but I think in the near future something like this might tell me a lot more than the pedigree records kept by the K9 associations. 

https://shop.embarkvet.com/products/embark-for-breeders-dog-breeding-package?_gl=1*okzhnt*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE1OTg2NjQzNTUuQ2owS0NRancxcUw2QlJDbUFSSXNBRFY5SnRiNDVfZzZLR2FYVGhBYkVaRUdhaGZPTHVGUmJaS3FLeFFNQ1hub2FieUtfX2wzTDFPVHJVc2FBbmJERUFMd193Y0I.&_ga=2.6962741.669324769.1598664326-653636141.1597860419&_gac=1.51892699.1598664357.Cj0KCQjw1qL6BRCmARIsADV9Jtb45_g6KGaXThAbEZEGahfOLuFRbZKqKxQMCXnoabyK__l3L1OTrUsaAnbDEALw_wcB

[asal]

bit puzzled Sandgrubber

 

 once your dogs have been dna profiled for the defect markers for their breed, you dont need to labs to tell you which dogs not to use.

Equally which ones not to put together

 

You can see that for yourself?

 

They will be there in black and white which markers they carry and which they are clear for.

Edited August 29, 2020 by asal

[asal]

for example.

the DNA profiles for these two horses was discovered to be identical

 

this boy is by Razaz from Hemera

 

Edited August 29, 2020 by asal

[asal]

 

this boy is by Aethon from Caprice

 

What they have in common is all four parents are from Department of Agriculture Studs. both have Sala and Razaz in their pedigree along with Shahzada

in the case of the Aethon son he has 7 crosses to Shahazada.

 

The Razaz son has also Sala and 1 cross to Shahzada.

 

So how on earth could their DNA BE SO ALIKE ?

 

both Sala and Razaz were SCIDS carriers.

 

Neither of these descendants are SCIDS carriers.

 

So to a lab sheet, these two are the same....  only a breeder looking at these horses can decide which would best suit individual females...   because according to the lab they are the same.

 

Obviously they most definitely are not the same .... are they

 

If you are scratching your head wondering what differences?

the top boy is far shorter in the back, far longer legs and much higher neck set, head is much shorter with dished face.

 

If you want to become a breeder you need to learn to read the dna sheets, you need to learn what to look for in the living individual just as much, because those dna sheets cant see what you can in the live animal.

 

remember, tis said, the camel was built by a committee.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 29, 2020 by asal

[sandgrubber]

23 minutes ago, asal said:

bit puzzled Sandgrubber

 

 once your dogs have been dna profiled for the defect markers for their breed, you dont need to labs to tell you which dogs not to use.

Equally which ones not to put together

 

You can see that for yourself?

 

They will be there in black and white which markers they carry and which they are clear for.

Sure, you can do it marker by marker. But when it reaches 300 health related markers (likely to increase to thousands) and sire and dam may be using different laboratories... or the tests may have changed since the sire was screened... there's an argument for doing the analysis in pairs and getting a bit of genetic counseling.  I seem to remember stories of awful panic setting in when 23 and Me was first released, and lots of recommendations that expert advice is called on for interpretation. 

 

I'm still trying to make sense of the changing landscape here and it's likely that my opinion will change. 

 

The main point is that the existing pedigree/show trial system does little to ensure health or temperament, and a lot of people don't place a high value on purity. (As a Labrador person, I also often doubt how pure the breed is.  When I see a Lab with long ears and a whip tail, I'm inclined to think there's a lot of hound blood back there somewhere... as was noted by Mary Roslin-Williams several decades ago). New tools are becoming available. It's good to be skeptical, but in time they may provide us with better ways to make breeding decisions. 

[sandgrubber]

5 minutes ago, asal said:

for example.

the DNA profiles for these two horses was discovered to be identical

 

this boy is by Razaz from Hemera

 

Using what / how many markers? There have been misidentifications in criminology.  Given greater scrutiny for quality control and use of much larger portions of the genome, 'identical' profiles will be extremely rare. 

[asal]

34 minutes ago, sandgrubber said:

Using what / how many markers? There have been misidentifications in criminology.  Given greater scrutiny for quality control and use of much larger portions of the genome, 'identical' profiles will be extremely rare. 

LOL the lab nearly went nuts.

 

they reran it expanding the markers, then reran a third time expanding even further  

the samples had been sent to sire verify a foal that was supposed to be by the aethon son.

 

but I knew he is a dominate grey and the foal was chestnut and was not going to go grey.

 

otherwise it would never have been discovered.

 

the only marker different was the Aethon son had two grey genes and the Razaz son only one grey gene.

 

which incidently I already knew anyway.  Razaz is chestnut so it was impossible for his son to have two grey markers.

 

so the DNA profile was for the societys satisfaction..

 

What else it proved was a surprise all round

 

OH!  their blood type was identical too.

 

This was done so long ago the grey marker had not been identified as such yet.   but the fact they found two similar markers on the Aethon son and only one in the same locus of the Razaz son was the only difference they could find .

 

The chap who found it was shouted dinner.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 29, 2020 by asal

[sandgrubber]

I often say stuff and then feel a need to go back and research it to make sure.  Tried that on genetic testing.  Looks like we're a long way from having a reliable guide there

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05771-0

And yes, counsel is likely needed, but maybe not from the company providing the tests. 

Edited August 29, 2020 by sandgrubber

[Rubytri]

New to the site, not sure how I found this thread but it just came up on some search I'd done. Interesting how Google works sometimes.

 

Asal, your comments are a breath of fresh air.

 

I don't show. 

I'm registered with ANKC and I breed my dogs - for pets. 

I have paid for a prefix and my dogs get the very best of care. They live in my house with me.

My dogs have all the necessary health testing with veterinary specialists and they have the necessary DNA health testing done before being bred. 

I have one stunning dog that I bought for breeding but temperament is not acceptable to me. They live as a pet with me after being desexed. I won't breed a bad temperament.

The people who have bought my puppies were going to buy oodle mixes but after learning about the importance of health testing and the predictability that comes with purebreds, they are now converts. They are also converting their friends.

My puppy buyers know that if for any reason they can't keep their dog, I will always take it back, I stand by the dogs I breed for the rest of their lives. 

I'm looking for another breeding bitch so I can have her health tested and DNA tested, then breed sound healthy purebred pets. Nobody will sell me one for this purpose. 

I agree that breeders of purebreds who don't recognise that it's ok to breed a healthy dog for people who just want pets are contributing to the demand for oodles and other mixes.  I have a friend who breeds moodles and cavoodles, she cannot keep up with demand, has at least one litter of mixed breed pups a month. $2000 a pup (she'd love to use my dogs but I've tactfully declined, I'd prefer to promote the well bred purebred). Groodle pups not so long ago were going for $6000 on Gumtree.

The comment about the number of Maltese registered shows it all - there are very few pure Maltese being bred/registered, but guess how many Maltese Shih Tzu mixes are out there? 

I'm ostracised by breeders when I approach them to enquire about buying a healthy purebred bitch for my purpose. 

Am I really that bad a person? Please, correct me if you think I'm doing the wrong thing here.