Thoughtful article on brachy breeding and vet responsibility

[Adrienne]

Yeah, I don't know. I wasn't calling you weird, just the whole situation is weird. I am a BYB by all accounts (I breed purebred dogs in my backyard and I am not involved with any association because I can't see the point for what I do) I have my ANCK application here all ready to submit, but I am also considering MDBA and can't decide. I think I can't decide because I can't see the point for myself, or my dogs,  or my sales.

 

I do health testing for my breed, I care for my dogs really well, and raise my pups really well and screen my buyers really well. There are enough horror stories about people having heart breaking outcomes with pups purchased from ANKC breeders not doing the right thing and the fact that many many people just get such hostile responses from some Breeders over the enquiries that they start looking further afield. I have sold pups of mine to people who have tried to go the "Right" route and have been frozen out by hostility or lack of response. I am not down on all the good breeders wherever they may be (we all know who we are), but I can assure you people will be getting a more sound animal from me than from a pet shop or the pound (where you can't get a nice puppy anyway).

 

It matters to me that my purebreds are good ones: sound and good looking! I operate with the same ethics and concerns all good breeders have and I see evidence in the marketplace that there are good pups across the spectrum (in terms of breeds/designer breeds/mutts). oI think the most effective thing is for BUYERS to be better buyers and stop buying crap animals from crap situations because they are cheap, convenient, or because the seller asks no questions... 

 

 

[Papillon Kisses]

@Adrienne you might like to look into RightPaw.

[Adrienne]

Papillon Kisses (how to do that bubble thing around the name?)  I don't get involved with those types of sites - like RPBA - it's a marketing gimmick and provides a screen of respectability to not very good commercial breeders. I have no trouble getting people to come into my backyard and see my set up and dogs/puppies first hand. I advertise on Gumtree and Trading post and its not hard to stand out on there as a breeder with clean, healthy, safe puppies. I don't have trouble selling my pups in my City. 

 

This was a thread about who/what is driving pure-bred breeders so sorry its gone off topic. My point was puppy buyers could be a force for change if they would step up to being more responsible buyers and so not reward poor breeding practices.

[moosmum]

I don't think this is off topic at all, when the O.P was pretty much about getting all steak holders to realize they have a part to play if any thing is to change.

 

I am not breeding ATM and haven't for nearly 10 years now, but was a similar situation to to yourself @Adrienne(Type @symbol followed by the name you are tagging, a list using the letters you type will pop up and by clicking the name you want it will embed). Looks like I have a good chance of resurrecting my line so so may be doing a last litter depending on the dams D.N.A results. Test just arrived, and litter all spoken for unless its much bigger than usual.

 

Fully agree buyers could (and should) be the biggest drivers if we expect support for the results. Breeders for their part need to stop protecting buyers from their own ignorance by trying to legislate responsibility. All thats doing is restrict it.  Its gone  beyond stating what should be provided. ie Sufficient clean food and water, shelter, daily  social and physical opportunities etc that should be subjectively assessed, to laying out an objective state that can only represent responsibility. Not real, because its not subjective. Not inclusive of environment, objective to.

Responsibilitys not a 'state' that can be maintained. The more 'fixed' a state is (thru' legislation in this case) the faster it will decay.  its a response, to expectations and demands of the environment. A fixed state can't effectively respond to those in any reasonable time frame to effect long term viability.

 

ANKC is a state 'fixed' to disregard and with hold free flow of information between the org. and its environment. Its not recognized.

ANKC is caught or trapped in their own state, in trying to re-enforce its separation from its environment. The 'rest of us'.

 

 

[Adrienne]

21 hours ago, moosmum said:

(Type @symbol followed by the name you are tagging, a list using the letters you type will pop up and by clicking the name you want it will embed)

Thank you!

 

21 hours ago, moosmum said:

Its gone  beyond stating what should be provided. ie Sufficient clean food and water, shelter, daily  social and physical opportunities etc that should be subjectively assessed, to laying out an objective state that can only represent responsibility. Not real, because its not subjective. Not inclusive of environment, objective to.

Responsibilitys not a 'state' that can be maintained

I am finding this a bit hard to follow. 

[coneye]

On 14/04/2023 at 1:23 PM, Adrienne said:

 

This is just weird. What is this saying? On the one hand ANKC breeders are the supposed to be the go-to for a great puppy with provenance, and BYB are supposed to be churning out crap pups with no provenance. But possibly BYB are breeding better dogs because they are not trying to match show standards (which in some breeds are not helping)?

 

 

 

 

Think you hit on something there ,, my current dog was fro the pound ,  previous dogs all been pedigrees from breeders , but like i said when looking for another shepard i gave up ,  the breeders dogs i looked at has far as i;m concerned were all ugly , unhealthy looking   jackel faced hunched backed  , short legged ,  BAD EXAMPLES  , that  cost an absolute fortune  and i think the only gaurantee i would of got is i'm gonna get huge vet bills ,, However   the one or two i did see   that were good looking dogs came from European stock  and were very very expensive and being bred more for security  , price   was out of my reach ,, But if jane up the road who had a nice one , decided she was going to mate her bitch with  peters  nice dog ,  provided both parents had a good temperment i would'nt hesitate to buy and could'nt care less if they were so called BYB  , 9 times out of 10 its them owners proud of there dogs and want to see some offspring , course there are exceptions ,, but the thing is they are breeding there dogs to  there   expectations of what  the breed is , not some show standard that keeps changing largely depending on who in power shouts the loudest    and wants change to suit there own dogs

[moosmum]

On 16/04/2023 at 9:05 AM, Adrienne said:

 

I am finding this a bit hard to follow. 

 

Its not easy, and I have a hard time finding how to express it so it is.

 

Basically, we can promote the expectation  dogs welfare needs be met. That would mean people need to understand what those needs are, and how meeting them effectively  gives better out comes for dogs, their owners and the community. It means recognition of the value dogs bring, and how we can maximize on that. Understanding breed and individual behaviors  temperament and needs.

How its done  evolves, with the dogs themselves, and along with Humanity. Varies situationally, or with the environment in which they are kept.Always has. There is nothing artificial about the Domestication of dogs. Their environment is Humanity and faces the same environmental interplay as other species, in their environments.

 

Or we can take the attitude being promoted by most, and lay out in minute detail exactly how those needs are to be met. But that assumes all dogs will always have the same requirements and all breeding environments are identical. Only dogs that thrive in those 'standardized' breeding environments will contribute to the  evolution of Dogs.

The conditions set out must be achieved  before a dog is selected for breeding, and takes long enough to set up that an individual dogs breeding potential will most likely be lost by the time it is. At least if a person is only considering breeding because they recognize they have some thing really special, worth breeding. It benefits a commercial motive above any other and directs breeding to that end. Other purpose for breeding  will be steadily lost over time, because a return on investment becomes essential 

A majority of people will find the conditions set out beyond their capabilities for financial reasons, space, zoning etc. Regardless of their actual capabilities  to meet the needs of the dogs in their care. So we have far fewer breeders, and far less variation in the dogs. The conditions are far more favorable to some than others, taking into account individual temperaments and behaviors and costs other than financial.

 

Also, and most importantly as far as I see, There is no expectation promoted, that breeders understand the dogs needs, the value of what they are doing, or why its done. The standards adhered to replace that need. As long as they provide the specified conditions, they're deemed 'responsible'. But its not to the dogs, its to the 'standard' or objective state of care. Weather its the one that best suits the individual dog or not. They don't need to have a clue about Dogs, so long as they understand the code.

All this means that the diverse environments dogs thrive in today, are reduced. They loose environment, because they are not being selected for response  to those. Just the cash they can bring at any given time while other contributions fade away from reduced opportunity.

On 16/04/2023 at 9:05 AM, Adrienne said:

 

 

On 16/04/2023 at 10:41 AM, coneye said:

Think you hit on something there ,, my current dog was fro the pound ,  previous dogs all been pedigrees from breeders , but like i said when looking for another shepard i gave up ,  the breeders dogs i looked at has far as i;m concerned were all ugly , unhealthy looking   jackel faced hunched backed  , short legged ,  BAD EXAMPLES  , that  cost an absolute fortune  and i think the only gaurantee i would of got is i'm gonna get huge vet bills ,, However   the one or two i did see   that were good looking dogs came from European stock  and were very very expensive and being bred more for security  , price   was out of my reach ,, But if jane up the road who had a nice one , decided she was going to mate her bitch with  peters  nice dog ,  provided both parents had a good temperment i would'nt hesitate to buy and could'nt care less if they were so called BYB  , 9 times out of 10 its them owners proud of there dogs and want to see some offspring , course there are exceptions ,, but the thing is they are breeding there dogs to  there   expectations of what  the breed is , not some show standard that keeps changing largely depending on who in power shouts the loudest    and wants change to suit there own dogs

 

This is why breeding out side of the registries should be recognized  and continue. Those breeders are the interface between the org. and its environment, whos needs and demands can't be met if they are not recognized.

[Adrienne]

On 14/4/2023 at 9:22 PM, Papillon Kisses said:

 you might like to look into RightPaw.

@Papillon Kisses, I did check them out this morning as it had been a while since I had looked at their gig ( I think when they first got up I had a look see because the owner of the stud I used had gone that way). And yes, still feel the same, however I thought the Puppy parent training program was  good for buyers (and what a clever way to make $100 for every puppy sold using their payment platform!)  . I can't imagine they have anything other than good standard advice/practice for new puppy owners and its great that for the buyers it is a complete package in that way. and they get to join a club. I do not like that the breeder has no control over the payment for the pup they sell, let's face it if something goes awry after the sale there is only the puppy and the money to work things out with. Imagine being a breeder with a returned pup (for a buyer side reason) and not being able to have any influence on whether a full or partial refund is warranted - or when no refund warranted at all but is given to the buyer by a third party whose only part in the gig is payment processing...No.

 

From my breeder point of view it's not worth it for me because I breed so few pups so am not "juggling" and trying to keep track of "all my puppy applications", and the buyers of course are told to make their own assessments blah blah. At the end of the day, as a buyer you still gotta get on the phone, get in your car and go stand in the place with the breeder and the dogs IRL (In Real Life). Because I am just one person carrying out a very small breeding program and preferring to sell my dogs into my local area it isn't really necessary. I can manage to screen and talk to and support half a dozen pups sales a year.

 

In my experience, when people want a puppy they compulsively look at all the online go to for puppy ads (Gumtree, Trading post, Rightpaw, RPBA, MDBA, Dogzonline) regardless because they enjoy it and you never know... its a becomes a bit like a treasure hunt and only stops when they get thier pup and are no longer looking).

 

 

[Adrienne]

5 hours ago, moosmum said:

Or we can take the attitude being promoted by most, and lay out in minute detail exactly how those needs are to be met. But that assumes all dogs will always have the same requirements and all breeding environments are identical. Only dogs that thrive in those 'standardized' breeding environments will contribute to the  evolution of Dogs.

OMG I just spent ages replying to this and hit submit and it all disappeared and  so....yeah. gotta go and tickle a puppy and will try again another time.

 

[asal]

On 12/04/2023 at 9:30 AM, ~Anne~ said:

I agree with this. The driver has changed and so has the vehicle.

 

The culture, purpose and art of the pedigree dog world is now very much in the background and in slow demise. Even though it was always considered a 'hobby' it was the epicentre of the canine world. It was the superpower. Unfortunately (in my perosnal view) through a lack of forward thinking and acceptance of a mature and modern changing market, its being left behind to curl up in a corner and wither away. More's the shame. 

 

 

 

 

yes, spot on.   It has been interesting to see how the mindset changed from welcome new people, then changed, that to be ethical and responsible become a dead end kennel with all puppies on limit register.   

 

As well as the parallel  campaign to drive from the membership anyone the self appointed thought police decide is a dreaded puppy farmer/backyard breeder, despite the fact even the thought police have what?  A backyard?

 

 

so the end is now in sight. 

[asal]

On 11/04/2023 at 2:25 PM, moosmum said:

 

I think you under estimate the influence the oldest representative body for Dog Breeders has, and has had. If the 'ethical' experts see no need to address the problems, there is no expectation being set to do so. You can't hold the environment responsible for the failures of dogs and breeders by abdicating ANKCs own.

 

 

The constitution of ANKC decided on its formation the make-up of its membership. Thats what a constitution is/does. It provides the objective purpose and properties of the organization or 'body' of its constituent membership. The constitution can only do what its directed to. Its the 'genetic' blue print for the body created.

 

The kennel Clubs were ostensibly created for the purpose of improving Dog Breeding,  using  pedigrees to increase the information available to breeders, to better understand the genetics and back ground of breeding stock used- To understand the foundations being built on in any mating. 

This should have been the creation of an environment where a service is provided to Dog breeders to make use of, and promote the value of doing so through demonstration.ie, the results should speak for themselves. You want the best dog possible for what you will invest in it? One bred with consistent deliberation of its content should afford you the best chance of meeting your expectations. If thats seen to be true, support will follow.

 

The closed stud books and standards have been a huge problem, but one that could and should have have been easily overcome long ago,by informed consensus of membership. What has made this  impossible to achieve in any effective way is the constitution of the body. That was  in-formed  with a belief or bias against the environment it was ostensibly to serve. Dogs and Breeders.

 

An effective constitution has a  clear objective set out to define (give margins and limitation to) its membership or property. It is only concerned with what takes place within the body of its membership, in service to the  objective. It must be that way, to have integrity and viability as a 'body'.

If its margins or definitions are not clear, there is no Objectivity. Objectivity is dependent on disregarding relationship, or there is there is bias.

 

The Kennel clubs were in-formed with the language of the constitution. Language is biological. Its what D.N.A operates with. When the K.Cs made the declaration on their founding documents that they do not recognize cross breed dogs, or dogs not bred according to the  rules and regulations set out in their constitution, The  Objective was corrupted and lost. No longer viable in the long term. The bodies definition is  reduced. Its no longer a clear objective. Its now dependent on a negative bias towards what takes place beyond its own body or definition. 

 

Its not reality. Value is ALWAYS subjective. The Objective has no value. Any value  found in the objective, is  subjective. The K.Cs  applied a value to their objective in a accepting a declaration  contradictory to their objective. It creates a double negative in the language they are founded on. It means the opposite of what was intended and its been operating on this false reality for over 150 years now. Well entrenched and only doing what its programed to do according the language used. An objective must be independent of value, beyond its 'being'. Any declaration or statement regarding what occurs beyond the objective body must corrupt its definition.

 

ANKC objective is not improvement of Dogs, or Breeding practices. According to the language given, its objective is to Standards or  'states' that are recognized by  content, as  present, and verified by certification to contain no 'less' than the content of its own state . An English Bulldog or Pug with a longer nose or healthier physique is no longer a bulldog.  Its an alteration of the state a member has agreed to recognize as one. It can't be rewarded in the ring without the judge facing a backlash supported by the constitution all members agreed to when signing up.  If the pedigree is 'broken' in achieving the healthier version, the backlash must be even worse. Its value or verification is null and void according to ANKC constitution.

 

I don't expect this explanation will make any more difference than than I have achieved in the past, and its damn frustrating to to keep trying when what you are up against is, essentially, Faith. Faith in the Pedigree system to be the only valid representation of a Dog or Breeder, as it stands today.

But I have repeated stated where this must inevitably lead, and how to correct it. And watched as it all comes to pass. I think its too late now to save dogs, unless there was immediate action and I see no sign of that. ANKCs constitution does not allow for recognition of whats beyond their own instruction.

Even when it ensures only destruction.

 

In short, reality depends on proper application of the Objective and Subjective in tandem. When its not correctly applied, The objective reality is not viable.

Its discredited. So Dogs and their Breeders are still going to be discredited to the point of non- existence. There is no clear definition between the objective and subjective values.

 

 

yet the ankc can and has opened the register.   Remember when it had classification days and accepted classified Australian stumpy tailed cattledogs into the "development register" and ultimately full pedigree of their descendants.   so they have proven this can be done.

 

 

I expect this will become the case down the track for many breeds facing extinction within the register.  As the Stumpies proved, there are tens of thousands being bred outside the ankc to replace the gene pool within the ankc.

 

Certainly if the ankc wants to continue to exist.

 

[moosmum]

3 hours ago, asal said:

 

 

yet the ankc can and has opened the register.   Remember when it had classification days and accepted classified Australian stumpy tailed cattledogs into the "development register" and ultimately full pedigree of their descendants.   so they have proven this can be done.

 

 

I expect this will become the case down the track for many breeds facing extinction within the register.  As the Stumpies proved, there are tens of thousands being bred outside the ankc to replace the gene pool within the ankc.

 

Certainly if the ankc wants to continue to exist.

 

Yes. So its in their interests not to eliminate 'backyard breeders'.

 

When they could encourage them instead to make use of the knowledge and tools out there to do it better.

It would provide a healthier environment to draw these dogs from. And a more informed/responsible customer base.

[Mairead]

I've never liked the term backyard breeder. Some would be impulse breeders, accidental breeders, profit breeders or even oblivious breeders.

[_PL_]

Given my real life experience with backyarders vs alternative registry vs ANKC I know who I would choose. 

[asal]

The term "backyard breeder"   incorporates EVERYONE who has a backyard?     Which is what percentage of Australians who do not live in a high rise, caravan park or a tent?

 

I have never understood why the term was so enthusiastically embraced to define who should be eliminated?

 

the stupidity of the human race continues to amaze me.

[sandgrubber]

On 19/04/2023 at 3:35 PM, Mairead said:

I've never liked the term backyard breeder. Some would be impulse breeders, accidental breeders, profit breeders or even oblivious breeders.

Some use the term for anyone who doesn't show. 

[Pjrt]

The problem I see is the dogged pursuit of ‘purity’. That can only ever go one way. To the bottom of the ever shallowing gene pool. Close a gene pool, keep breeding within that closed gene pool. Problems arise. Health Test the shit out of everything. Chuck out anything flagged in a health test depleting the gene pool more. More problems. More advanced health testing….more genes lost. All the while insisting everything that’s not deemed ‘suitable’ at 12 weeks is desexed….

that’s the other side of bringing back heath with out crossing…..there not much left out there due to the mindset of desexing. 
The saying ‘for the betterment of the breed’. Wtf does that even mean. It’s like people need to see incremental forward movement in everything these days. Somehow can’t be happy that something is great the way it was and work on keeping it that way. 
ughh I could go on and on. But for me, while I appreciate a ‘breed’ a ‘pedigree’ it is not the future for dogs. The whole show scene, the locked in standards, it’s almost run it’s course. It’s a blip in time. I just hope dogs can claw their way out of the mess.

There are as many great dogs outside the pedigree arena as there are inside of it. We just need to see past, outside.

 

and thanks @moosmum for taking the time to post. I always enjoy your critical thinking. Another thing disappearing …..

I have a clumsy way of expressing myself but I love reading critical thought. 
 

[Mairead]

On 19/04/2023 at 9:31 PM, asal said:

 

 

the stupidity of the human race continues to amaze me.

I'm never amazed. Blame sexual reproduction with the resulting diversity, then no selection of breeding partners for health, intelligence etc. Almost everyone breeds.

The Darwin Awards recognise those people who have removed themselves from the gene pool in a spectacular and/or stupid way.

Edited April 22, 2023 by Mairead

[Pjrt]

I really wish the countries and clubs going down the route of outcrossing & back crossing all the best. 
but I can’t help turn my mind to the HUA v LUA Dalmatian project. 
There are still plenty of ‘purists’ out there decrying a healthy version of the Dalmatian because of ONE cross FIFTY YEARS AGO!!!  So I can only barely imagine the shit these breeders are going to have to push up hills to fight for better versions of their breeds today. 

 

https://ckcusa.com/blog/2019/november/the-dalmatian-back-cross-project/

 

[moosmum]

3 hours ago, Podgus said:

The problem I see is the dogged pursuit of ‘purity’. That can only ever go one way. To the bottom of the ever shallowing gene pool. Close a gene pool, keep breeding within that closed gene pool. Problems arise. Health Test the shit out of everything. Chuck out anything flagged in a health test depleting the gene pool more. More problems. More advanced health testing….more genes lost. All the while insisting everything that’s not deemed ‘suitable’ at 12 weeks is desexed….

that’s the other side of bringing back heath with out crossing…..there not much left out there due to the mindset of desexing. 
The saying ‘for the betterment of the breed’. Wtf does that even mean. It’s like people need to see incremental forward movement in everything these days. Somehow can’t be happy that something is great the way it was and work on keeping it that way. 
ughh I could go on and on. But for me, while I appreciate a ‘breed’ a ‘pedigree’ it is not the future for dogs. The whole show scene, the locked in standards, it’s almost run it’s course. It’s a blip in time. I just hope dogs can claw their way out of the mess.

There are as many great dogs outside the pedigree arena as there are inside of it. We just need to see past, outside.

 

and thanks @moosmum for taking the time to post. I always enjoy your critical thinking. Another thing disappearing …..

I have a clumsy way of expressing myself but I love reading critical thought. 
 

 

You manage better than I do. Good to see you back!

 

The dogged pursuit of purity, and the statement that that nothing 'less' be recognized.

An 'Objective' with a negative bias, is a negative objective.

It destroys the foundations Domestic Dogs were built upon, and undermines their foundations leaving them nothing to stand on.

 

Like it or not, Domestic Dogs were developed by back yard Breeders, Selecting for their own needs, in their own back yards, to complement their own values and objectives. Thats what gave us the 'pure' breeds we love, and kept them 'working' reliably for their intended purpose(s), in multiple environments.

No other singular objective can viably replace that.