Vulernable Breed Final Crufts 2025

[Deeds]

 

[DogsAndTheMob]

I think the Crufts Vulnerable Breed Competition is a great idea, but I wonder whether the more popular breeds are almost as vulnerable.

 

In terms of breed preservation, the most important factor is not the number of dogs born or even the number of breeding dogs but rather the number of dogs that will contribute to the breed in the long term. This number reduces generation by generation and has now done so for well over a century.

 

Firstly, in most breeds, only a small proportion of puppies are registered as main register. This protects kennels’ reputations but I don’t know how much it protects the dogs from careless breeding outside the registry. It DOES reduce the effective population size for these breeds within the internationally recognised registries.

 

Secondly, only some of the main register dogs will be bred and a few amongst those will contribute disproportionately to the next generation. There are sometimes very sound health, temperament and conformation reasons to exclude a dog from a breeding program but often the decision to breed one dog in preference to his equally sound sibling is based on chance. A show dog may be preferred because his flashier markings have caught the judges’ eyes or a working gun dog may achieve success because he has been trained more skilfully or campaigned more heavily. Breeders overlook the big contribution that his sibling could make, if bred selectively alongside his more successful brother - the potential to increase breeding population size and reduce inbreeding in future generations while retaining traits valued by the breeder.

 

Thirdly, only a small proportion of kennels contribute to the breed in the long term. A lot of small and midsize kennels are dedicated to improving the breed and produce excellent quality dogs but lack the “name” and the success that would attract interest from other breeders. Their dogs are excellent ambassadors for the breed but don’t contribute to the gene pool in the long term.

 

Finally, even the popularity of very successful kennels and bloodlines may wane over time, as breeders age and participate less in the dog world. If the breed is lucky, some of their dogs may make lasting contributions to the genetics of the breed. However, as preferences change, the qualities inherited by the descendants of their dogs may be overlooked by other breeders. I’ve seen that happen and it makes me sad… so much dedication to the breed just going to waste in the long term.

 

The long term effects are a loss of heterogeneity - and arguably a loss of vitality - in individual dogs and a loss of genetic diversity across even popular breeds. After more than a century, I fear that I’m seeing the consequences of these genetic bottlenecks. 
 

I’m not saying the popular breeds will die out. Most won’t. They’ll be maintained by dogs bred outside the internationally recognised registries. But I think problems will increase within the popular registries. I’ll give you an example. I recently saw a discussion about Golden Retrievers in North America. Golden Retrievers have a high cancer rate, with a frightening number of very young dogs succumbing to lymphoma and slightly older dogs dying suddenly from haemangiocarcinoma. In this discussion, someone asked where they could find a puppy that wasn’t descended from a particular kennel whose dogs were rumoured to be at higher risk of cancer. They were told that it would be difficult to find a puppy whose pedigree didn’t trace back to that kennel. Whether or not the rumours about that kennel were true, I find it frightening that one kennel could contribute so disproportionately even to a very popular breed in one of the largest registries in the world.

[Boronia]

Yay, go the Dandie!