The pedigree system and domestic Dogs

[naitche]

I want to  find ways  to combat the problems seen in Pedigree dog breeding, and the Pedigree culture that perpetuates  those problems.

I immersed myself into that culture via forums to study and understand it.

I have found it worse than I expected, not so much for the attitudes that prevail, as for the effects that culture has on its environment and the species as a whole.

I see a very real danger that our rights to keep dogs, our abilities to respond to the species, and to breed  for purpose is being increasingly eroded.

Hoping for discussion that will help change that.

The Pedigree Registries mostly include in their constitutions, or mission statements words to the effect that non-pedigree dogs are not recognised. I'm pretty sure that this statement is the root cause of the majority of problems and the difficulty in changing the culture.

Its effects on the broader environment are hidden, but real.

[beecee]

I dont know if this will answer whatever problem you see with Pedigree Registries or not, but people sometimes are after a specific dog with specific traits. My two dogs at this time are Miniature smooth haired Dachsunds. Why did I chose that breed? Because I was after a recognised house dog and a dog/s that did not or at least had minimal doggy smell. Reason for that, My Mrs suffers from Asthma. I also wanted a fearless breed that could in some ways act as a watch dog. Dachsunds are fearless breeds, sometimes to a fault, particulalry with some much larger version of a dog! My parents also bred Miniature Dachsunds hence my familiarity with them. Faults?? They are sometimes prone to hips Dysplacia and should be controlled as much as possible from jumping up and down of chairs/beds etc. They also make very good feet warmers in the Winter in bed!

Other dogs I have had....Two Rottweilers, German Shepard, and a Labrador. My favourite all time best breed?? The old Rotty...Great dog, intelligent, fearsome look, fearless persona, great watch dog, although both the Rotty's I had at different times, were great big bloody sooks! 

The most important aspect with any dog breed, pedigree or otherwise, is an intelligent owner who is able to administer plenty of TLC, along with firmness in training the animal. I have never had any problem with any dog I have ever had. 

[Carrock]

2 hours ago, beecee said:

They are sometimes prone to hips Dysplacia and should be controlled as much as possible from jumping up and down of chairs/beds etc.

Genetic defects like that, caused by inbreeding, is a major point of naitche's post.

[naitche]

53 minutes ago, Carrock said:

Genetic defects like that, caused by inbreeding, is a major point of naitche's post.

Yes.

These are increasing at an incredible rate and are becoming far more prevalent than most owners realise. Cancers, haemophilia, and mental disorders too.The list is growing and is at  the stage now where to breed even cross breeds ideally requires extensive genetic testing for multiples of  conditions.

Then we have the deliberate breeding of extreme physical characteristics that cause their own problems for the dogs quality of life and life expectation.

I understand the Pedigree system has a lot of benefits for reliability of traits.

But the selection for those traits is no longer  driven by 'environmental' demand or expectation. At least not if you consider the environment for domestic dogs must be humanity. The environment has become the K.Cs ( or Kennel Clubs)  The Breed Standard, as awarded in the show ring, has replaced the environmental conditions governing selection. And shapes our expectation according to what is demonstrated.

Edited August 31, 2018 by naitche

[dimreepr]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedigree_Dogs_Exposed

Personally, I find some of the practices reprehensible.

[John Cuthber]

4 hours ago, beecee said:

The most important aspect with any dog breed, pedigree or otherwise, is an intelligent owner

OK, Imagine I'm intelligent and looking to get a dog.
I have essentially two choices. I can get a puppy from the bloke down the street who didn't realise his pet bitch was in heat (God only knows who the pup's father is).

Or I can pay a lot of money for a dog whose genetic defects are so predictable that I can research them in detail on the web.

 

As an "intelligent owner", which should I choose?

The breeders seem to want it both ways. They tell me that breeds of dogs have characteristic traits (a few have been listed here) and then they tell me (for example) that Rottweilers are not really innately aggressive.

 

Incidentally, Asthma is triggered by dander, rather than the smell of a dog.

[DrP]

10 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

 I can get a puppy from the bloke down the street who didn't realise his pet bitch was in heat (God only knows who the pup's father is).

Or I can pay a lot of money for a dog whose genetic defects are so predictable that I can research them in detail on the web.

 

One of the best dogs I ever had was a total pick a mix. He was definitely part Labrador, part Greyhound, part Dalmatian....   and at least a few other things thrown into the mix that weren't so obvious. He was a rescue dog that had been treated very badly and neglected. Once we got him out of his shell and into our loving family he was great dog. He was tough, loving, intelligent, brave, playful, funny and one of the most resilient dogs I've know....  although a little needy (probably from being neglected).  He saved me from dog attacks more than once against much bigger dogs, he survived being run over and having his legs broken, survived severe sickness and even survived the dreaded Parvo disease that is usually the end for any dog - he pulled through to live years more. We put his toughness down to a good mix of other breads. He got out a few times and was notorious for finding the ladies in heat  -  there are many dogs in our old area that have the same markings on their backs and with his twisted sticky up tail even today.  

I've not know any dog get through Parvo - the vet said he was amazing.  This is my shout out to mixed breed dogs...  they are the best imo!   

 

[John Cuthber]

Nobody should be surprised when a mongrel dog is fit and healthy.
It's a well documented (and explained) biological trait.

In plant breeding it's' called "hybrid vigour"; more formally, it's this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterosis

 

[DrP]

8 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Nobody should be surprised when a mongrel dog is fit and healthy.
It's a well documented (and explained) biological trait.

 

Yea I know that  - but Parvo! We were well impressed with him for that and so was the vet. Most dogs that get that don't pull through.

[John Cuthber]

17 minutes ago, DrP said:

Yea I know that  - but Parvo! We were well impressed with him for that and so was the vet. Most dogs that get that don't pull through.

It would be interesting to see the survival figures for mongrels and pedigrees.

[Strange]

There is quite a trend for cross-breeds at the moment, I don't know if that will change attitudes in the longer term. You know the sort of thing, labradoodle (Labrador-poodle cross), cockapoo (cocker spaniel-poodle), shitmenot (shitzu-dandy dinmont)

OK, I made that last one up

[DrP]

1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

It would be interesting to see the survival figures for mongrels and pedigrees.

Yea it would.  I just had a quick search, but can't spend too long on it as I am at work. Apparently it isn't as deadly as people think if the dog gets treatment. If treated, 15% of puppies that get it die according to a google search. Maybe this is due to modern medicine - I am talking 30 years ago, maybe the medicine wasn't as good then or something.

I would 'guess' than a mongrel would be more resilient but I would be speculating - it seems to make sense but would be nice if confirmed.  

 

Edited August 31, 2018 by DrP
spelling

[John Cuthber]

It wouldn't be easy to get a valid answer. People who pay for designer pets are probably able to pay for better treatment; that would skew the figures.

[DrP]

OK - seems that some breads are more susceptible - doesn't mention mixed breads though from my skim reading. https://dogcare.dailypuppy.com/breeds-susceptible-parvo-8187.html

[naitche]

4 hours ago, dimreepr said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedigree_Dogs_Exposed

Personally, I find some of the practices reprehensible.

Yeah. 

Interesting too to look  at illustrations of some of our modern breeds and how they have changed in 100 years. Shar pei , Bull terriers, and most Mastiff breeds can be pretty shocking.

2 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

OK, Imagine I'm intelligent and looking to get a dog.
I have essentially two choices. I can get a puppy from the bloke down the street who didn't realise his pet bitch was in heat (God only knows who the pup's father is).

Or I can pay a lot of money for a dog whose genetic defects are so predictable that I can research them in detail on the web.

 

As an "intelligent owner", which should I choose?

The breeders seem to want it both ways. They tell me that breeds of dogs have characteristic traits (a few have been listed here) and then they tell me (for example) that Rottweilers are not really innately aggressive.

 

Incidentally, Asthma is triggered by dander, rather than the smell of a dog.

You've hit it with this. Predictability  isn't the same as reliability.

Predictability reduces other possible  responses.

The push for predictability through a pedigree system also reduces our own response-ability to the species.

The K.Cs could be a positive influence on Dog ownership and breeding practices. They are not, and I'm sure thats largely because they refuse to recognise the value of a dog without a pedigree. 

To be recognised as a 'Dog breeder' and assisted, mentored or encouraged  requires membership into a Pedigree registry. So signing up to an agreement that those working out side that system shouldn't be recognised for any value.

 

Re; parvo, Black and tan dogs are more vulnerable , and seem to be more commonly affected by haemophilia too.

Regarding working ability of guardian breeds, These breeds under the K.Cs seem to inevitably split into two groups, Show line and working line.

Working line dogs are tested and proven through trials. The working Dog version of the show ring. Set stimulus to provoke predictable response. Modern training methods have come to rely on training over natural ability for predictable results.

A very high prey drive and state of arousal is usually sought to achieve that since its a drive that can be utilised for ease of training. Not within the ability of the average dog owner to manage safely or effectively.

Even so, the rate of wash out seems to increase over time so that those once popular breeds are used less and less often.

The Malinois is taking over for now.

 

Edited August 31, 2018 by naitche

[beecee]

11 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

OK, Imagine I'm intelligent and looking to get a dog.
I have essentially two choices. I can get a puppy from the bloke down the street who didn't realise his pet bitch was in heat (God only knows who the pup's father is).

Or I can pay a lot of money for a dog whose genetic defects are so predictable that I can research them in detail on the web.

 

As an "intelligent owner", which should I choose?

When I speak of an intelligent owner, I'm speaking of someone who can and does give plenty of TLC to his or her dog, along with a firm hand and appropriate discipline, irrespective of pedigree or lack thereof. I have had two Rottweilers, a generally known large breed with an undeserved aggressive nature, and have never once had any problem with that supposed aggression with any person or other dog because they saw me as the "Alpha". At the same time both would never let anyone unknown enter our property until I had given the OK...a great deterrent for the wandering seven day adventists and AGers that sometimes walk our streets preaching and handing out their watch tower magazines. 

No pet of mine was ever "wacked" for any misbehaviour, rather a change in ones voice that reflects displeasure along with no pats or acts of TLC for a few moments. 

 

Quote

The breeders seem to want it both ways. They tell me that breeds of dogs have characteristic traits (a few have been listed here) and then they tell me (for example) that Rottweilers are not really innately aggressive.

Get's back to my intelligent owner argument. BTW, my second Rotty lived to be 13.5 years old, and ended up having to be put down due to bone cancer. One of the miniature Dachsunds my parents bread, lived to 15 years and secumbed for the same reasons....cancer.

 

14 hours ago, Carrock said:

Genetic defects like that, caused by inbreeding, is a major point of naitche's post.

OK, I accept that. Which is why with some care, preventive action is needed.

[naitche]

The biggest barrier to improvement in the K.Cs is the culture. To understand  that, it makes sense to look at the constitution and mission statements.

While I was exploring that angle, I looked for guides to the writing of a successful constitution and found a text where it was advised that negative rules or statements are avoided.

The reasoning being that positive rulings/statements provide direction. Negative gives no direction , only blocks it, most often in unforeseen ways.

It was also advised that any ruling or statement should be to define the working of the organisation, so relate to those only. Any reference in the negative to what lies beyond the workings of the organisation should also be avoided.

Reason being that what is beyond the organisation is its environment. So a negative ruling is  a ruling against the environment. 

I haven't been able to find that document lately, so can't refer back to it to be exact. In essence though, it said that in stating non pedigree Dogs are not recognised, the organisation would not recognise its environment. The result would be to take dogs out of their environment.

The Organisation as Organism idea.

I figured the K.Cs would be a very good test of that hypothesis since they

Have been going for over 150 years, so multi generational.

A generation  as a breeder is shorter than a  human one.( averages out at about 7-10 years, high rate of attrition) 

The dogs themselves and their position in their environment give an additional, observable evolutionary  reference.

Evolutionary changes should be easier to observe and note. And the effects  able to be measured.

So is that what is happening?

I am sure it is. Though I think its more apt to describe  the organisation as  part of an organism, That identifies as something separate. Its  definition of self excludes  the organism.

What its founded on. So actively undermines its own foundations.

I know I'm not good at language to get this across well,  but it looks to me like the K.Cs are driving cultural change and expectation to exclude dogs.They lose purpose and value to the  human community and the human community looses its ability to respond to dogs- looses its response-ability to dogs.

Legislation to target irresponsible practices becomes aimed at environments where poor practices are demonstrated, rather than promoting  and rewarding demonstration of better practice.

The K.Cs loose their ability to meet the needs and expectations of their environment. They are aimed at meeting the expectation and demands of the breed standards.

 Demonstrated as successful in the show ring or Ring sports. Not in the broader environment.

The trend to cross breeds might look positive at 1st, but is connected to an increased commodification of dogs as accessories with little purpose and increased reliance on commercial motives and practices. We expect far less of dogs today than 100 or even 50 years ago.

We loose our response-ability to dogs because we are less familiar with them, with their diverse needs and requirements. with the demonstrations of the practices that maximise their value to us.

Familiarity and demonstration of value teaches responsibility. 

Legislation meant to target irresponsible practice is instead aimed at environments where irresponsible practice is recognised,

because out side of the K.Cs, responsible practices rarely are. They are discredited.

Even the designer dogs benefiting from their new popularity are increasingly driven  to registering bodies that compete to standardise  the breeding practices, and  type.   Pedigrees are given to validate the dog. Rather than the dog being recognised for the value it can demonstrate to its environment.

The purpose of the K.Cs, if they are unable to recognise a dogs value without a pedigree, is to the pedigree, Not the dog.

They promote Pedigrees, not dogs. Any improvement to dogs must come through elimination. 

They have defined the space  the K.Cs will occupy by  its conditions, not its own scope. Its possibilities are unrecognised. 

 

 

Edited September 1, 2018 by naitche

[John Cuthber]

13 hours ago, beecee said:

preventive action is needed.

The way to prevent the diseases  brought about by inbreeding is to stop inbreeding.

[Itoero]

9 hours ago, naitche said:

Pedigrees are given to validate the dog. Rather than the dog being recognised for the value it can demonstrate to its environment.

The pedigree system is just a classification system to categorize dogs. I've been to two dogsleddingfarms and It was pretty clear people care more for the validity of a dog then it's pedigree. There is nothing wrong with this system. There is something wrong with the way many dogs are bred, but that's not necessary related to this system.

On ‎31‎/‎08‎/‎2018 at 11:18 AM, John Cuthber said:

I can pay a lot of money for a dog whose genetic defects are so predictable that I can research them in detail on the web.

 

As an "intelligent owner", which should I choose?

I  payed 'a lot of money' for a dog free of known/predictable genetic defects.

If people care for the dogs they breed then they try to diminish the chance of genetic defects.

Edited September 1, 2018 by Itoero

[John Cuthber]

22 minutes ago, Itoero said:

If people care for the dogs they breed then they try to diminish the chance of genetic defects.

They have two choices.
They can inbreed- to maintain the "purity of the breed" or they can outbreed- " to diminish the chance of genetic defects."
They can not do both- because that's the way genetics works.

Which do they do?

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, Itoero said:

The pedigree system is just a classification system to categorize dogs. I've been to two dogsleddingfarms and It was pretty clear people care more for the validity of a dog then it's pedigree. There is nothing wrong with this system. There is something wrong with the way many dogs are bred, but that's not necessary related to this system.

It's exactly why there's inbreeding, some people love competition and those that can't do, do so vicariously, through there dogs in this case. Which dog lives up to an arbitrary measure of beauty is a shit excuse to feel like a winner (grow the biggest carrot FFS), but at least they have the excuse of being weird; breeders don't have that excuse they know what suffering they cause to make a buck.

Edited September 1, 2018 by dimreepr

[naitche]

 

Itoero,

No, not the system. The culture. 

Sled dogs are bred for a purpose other than the 'standard' condition .

I'm not familiar with the registry governing sled dogs, if there is one. But I'm pretty sure that if it is an open registry it will will not be recognised by the F.C.I that the majority of pure breed registries now come under, or that it will be the F.C.I or any affiliated registry running the sled dog trials or competitions.

We have open registries here too for working dogs. mostly shepherd types. They are not recognised by 'Pure' breeders.    Breeders of dogs such as working Basset hounds are  discredited. Because their Dogs do not have an unbroken lineage pedigree proving it is the breed claimed, and differ in type. Do not conform to the standard as its recognised in the show ring today. Never mind that they are bred as Basset Hounds, from Basset Hounds, for the purpose of a Basset Hound and do it successfully.

"Thats not a Basset" 

 

 

Open registry working breeds  breeds may have a show line version that is recognised by Pure breed registries, but  kept distinct and apart from its working counter part. Show lines have recognition, but not once a working line is introduced from an open registry.

Dogs bred for any purpose other than the standard as its recognised in the show ring diverge. A pure breed working line version may still gain recognition in ring sports or trials under the F.C.I. Few breeds can gain recognition for value in both disciplines. Given enough time, I can almost guarantee no breed will.

Breeders  have tried to achieve success in both ring sports and show ring. Their success is almost nil and generally results in value lost to  working  line. No longer fit for purpose.

 

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, Itoero said:

I  payed 'a lot of money' for a dog free of known/predictable genetic defects.

Why? most mongrels are cheap or free. 

[John Cuthber]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Why? most mongrels are cheap or free. 

I think it's got something to do with being an intelligent owner.

[dimreepr]

19 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

I think it's got something to do with being an intelligent owner.

Indeed, and let's not forget a dog's traits are very predictable if raised right, they chase squirrels, they get excited when you say walkies, they sniff arses and when they fight its handbags at dawn (generally) etc... The only exceptions were 2 pedigree dogs that went nuts, one (an alsatian) attacked my uncle, for no reason, and almost severed his arm and one (a spaniel) that I managed to pin down.

Edited September 1, 2018 by dimreepr