A dog & canine forum. DogBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » DogBanter forum » Dog forums » Dog breeds
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Breeders and Inbreeding - Any way to tell?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old November 17th 03, 03:53 PM
Emily Carroll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



"Mile Sullivan" wrote in message
om...
That sounds like great advice, Diana. Unfortunately, some of these
breeders lie and, short of bringing a lie detector along with me, I
can't tell if they're being truthful or not.

I guess it's just a matter of waiting and watching.


Can't you just ask for a copy of the health cert results as well as pedigree
for the litter? That would pretty much cover any issues you might have as
far as inbreeding is concerned.

--
Emily Carroll
Dealing 80s Toys - Rainbow Brite - My Little Pony - More
Fluttervale Labradors: www.geocities.com/diamonds_in_her_eyes/dogs/
CPG: www.geocities.com/cyberpetgame/
4-H Club: www.geocities.com/woofsandwiggles/



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/2003


  #22  
Old November 17th 03, 03:58 PM
Mile Sullivan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tee, inbreeding/linebreeding is a complicated issue. I know most
breeders are not vets and probably don't have any credintials
whatsoever. They are self-proclaimed breeders. I've been researching
this inbreeding topic extensively, and most of the people who say
there are no ill effects are breeders. Those with the proper
credintials, I.E. Vets and Geneticists agree that severe inbreeding
will lead to decreased immune systems, reduced vigor, unstable
temperament, and a host of other problems. Very careful and selective
linebreeding can improve the breed, but I don't believe these
self-proclaimed breeders are qualified to do this.

So when you say "acceptable", I can't help but wonder just who this
practice is acceptable to.

Those who only sell under limited registration seem to think they're
better than the people who are looking for a high caliber dog. I
personally get my dogs fixed, but I'll be damned if someone is going
to FORCE me to do it. It's a matter of principle. I would say a kick
in the shins would be more appropriate than a pat on the back.

"Tee" wrote in message ...
Mike, inbreeding or line-breeding in dogs is not only normal but acceptable.
When people think of inbreeding they think of human/human where defects are
likely to happen. That's not the case with dogs. Many breeders line breed
to either try and double up on specific traits they can't find available
elsewhere or to keep specific traits out that would come in from outside
lines. A breeder who sells on limited registration does so to prevent
buyers from breeding the puppies unless they intend to show them and prove
that they are worthy (in terms of conformation) to be bred. They're keeping
their pups from going to homes where they'll be little more than
money-makers, overbred, and under-loved. IMO any breeder who sells on
limited registration or s/n contracts should be given a large pat on the
back for doing something to help decrease the number of unwanted pets in the
world.

  #23  
Old November 17th 03, 04:07 PM
Mile Sullivan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You're a classic example of what I'm talking about. This big brother
(or in your case Big Sister attitude of co-ownership is ludicrous.
Anyone who would sign such a contract is gullible and naive. It just
opens the door for some deranged breeder to decide she wants her dog
back and go after some unsuspecting, responsible dog owner for no good
reason at all.

You folks are a scary bunch. It's unfortunate that canine world has
been reduced to this. This is why these popular breeds are being bred
out of existance and people are being forced to make a crap shoot and
just buy from a pet store.

Thanks to people like you, the pet stores do a thriving business!


"Andrea" wrote in message ...
"Mile Sullivan" wrote in message
m...
I personally know two breeders who severely inbreed their dogs and
then sell them. They actually will take a female from the litter,
breed her with her father


Not /necessarily/ a horrible thing to do, mind you, provided it is done by
someone with the knowledge of the line, their dogs, proper health testing,
etc. It may also vary from breed to breed in terms of its acceptibility.
Linebreeding, (a step out from what is commonly called inbreeding in dogs eg
father/daughter, brother/sister, etc) is very common and often preferred.

until she can't produce any longer,


Ugh.

and then
repeat the cycle with the next litter.


Ugh, ugh, ugh.

What really gets me is that some (I said SOME not ALL) of these
breeders are the same ones who try to force the AKC "limited"
registration or produce ridiculous contracts preventing you from
breeding your own dogs.


This is a GOOD thing. Sorry, no sympathy from me. I would be suspect of any
breeder who didn't. Any non-show pup from me goes out this way. Heck, my
show pups go out with a contract and a co-ownership.

I believe this is a way for them to stem
competition from new breeders rather than their "holier than thou"
attitude of claiming it's to prevent irresponsible breeding.


Well, your welcome to your opinion. You might be right in some cases. Your
characterization of responsible breeders doesn't work in your favor here.
The reason doesn't matter, because less dogs is a good thing. There is no
need for the average pet owner to breed a dog, ~especially~ if it's from the
folks described above, assuming you've done so accurately. You can't have it
both ways here. If you think there's a problem with their breeding
practices, why would you want to breed the offsping? This is a GOOD thing.

If you are interested in becoming involved with purebred dogs, you intend to
show/work your dogs and health screen, most breeders are more than happy to
work with you. But you have to be willing to show your dedication and
sincerity. Joe Blow pet owner has neither the desire to dedicate the time to
learn what is needed to breed dogs well, nor is he usually equiped with it
at the outset. Such a person should not be breeding dogs. Period.

Even more amazing is that these same inbred dogs are AKC registered!


Why is that amazing? If they are purebred, and correctly registered, then
why should the registry not accept them?

I know this guy
quite well and believe he really does breed a high caliber lab. (His
litters are not frequent and he has a long waiting list so I'm not
going to give out his name in case you wanted to ask)


That's just stupid. You should /promote/ good breeders.

My question is: Is there any way to tell if a
puppy has been inbred


The pedigree.

or overbred?


Get a sire or dam report from the AKC. Assuming you mean bred many times by
"overbred".

Could this be used to tell the quality of a breed?


Short answer: No.

  #24  
Old November 17th 03, 06:23 PM
Robin Nuttall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Mile Sullivan wrote:

Tee, inbreeding/linebreeding is a complicated issue. I know most
breeders are not vets and probably don't have any credintials
whatsoever. They are self-proclaimed breeders. I've been researching
this inbreeding topic extensively, and most of the people who say
there are no ill effects are breeders. Those with the proper
credintials, I.E. Vets and Geneticists agree that severe inbreeding
will lead to decreased immune systems, reduced vigor, unstable
temperament, and a host of other problems. Very careful and selective
linebreeding can improve the breed, but I don't believe these
self-proclaimed breeders are qualified to do this.


Hmmmmm. YOu haven't done enough research. There are actually very few
veterinarians who know enough about the topic to pose an opinion. Many
breeders ARE far more educated on this subject than most veterinarians,
,who may have had genetics for a semester at most, when the breeder may
have decades of actual hands-on experience and expertise.

One veterinary expert who did study canine genetics was the late John
Armstrong, who advocated outcrossing and ran a list called cangen-l
about canine genetics and the issues with in/line breeding.

However, of equal stature is George Padgett, DVM, author of Control of
Canine Genetic Disease, and he is not anti line/inbreeding.

Lately, there's been some work that suggests that selective inbreeding
within a population may be the way to go. For instance, a particular
related line of dogs within a breed may have excellent hip scores. If
outcrossed with no thought to anything but outcrossing, they may lose
those excellent hip scores. However, say those dogs also have a fair
amount of cancer, but another line within the breed has little cancer
but could use improvement on hip scores. Crossing those two inbred lines
may result in an overall improvement in the breed. OTOH it may also
result in dysplastic dogs with hip dysplasia.

This isn't a simple subject. YOu can't make any broad statements. Line
and inbreeding can be wonderful tools. So can outcrossing. But for any
breeding scheme to work breeders must understand the strengths and
weaknesses not only of their own dogs, but of their ancestors. They must
test, they must be honest. I know a good number of "inbred" dogs who
have lived very long, healthy lives. I happen to own an "outcrossed" dog
at the moment who is also extremely healthy and who is from a line of
dogs who lived well past the average in my breed.

No easy answers.


  #25  
Old November 17th 03, 07:09 PM
Mary Healey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mile Sullivan wrote:
Tee, inbreeding/linebreeding is a complicated issue.


Some aspects are, but most aren't.

I know most
breeders are not vets and probably don't have any credintials
whatsoever. They are self-proclaimed breeders.


"self-proclaimed"? Nonsense.

I've been researching
this inbreeding topic extensively, and most of the people who say
there are no ill effects are breeders. Those with the proper
credintials, I.E. Vets and Geneticists


Vets generally aren't geneticists, and know no more about genetics than
any other well-informed layperson. That's still reams more than the
know-nothing contingent.

agree that severe inbreeding will lead


No, dear. MAY lead. Nothing's sure but death and taxes.

snipI
personally get my dogs fixed, but I'll be damned if someone is going
to FORCE me to do it. It's a matter of principle.


You probably look funny, being noseless and all.

--
Mary H. and the Ames National Zoo: Regis, Sam-I-Am, Noah (1992-2001),
Ranger, Duke,
felines, and finches

  #26  
Old November 18th 03, 01:51 AM
Andrea
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mile Sullivan" wrote
snip

Thanks to people like you, the pet stores do a thriving business!


If no one bought dogs from them, they would not be in business. Blame the
folks who are part of the cycle - the millers and their buyers.

The fact that you're most concerned about is the contract, and LR and
spay/neuter is very telling. It's one thing not to want to buy a dog on a
co-ownership, but quite another to fail to see the value in spay/neuter
contracts.

I'm curious - would you buy a puppy that was already altered if it was
offered on full ownership?

--
-Andrea Stone
Saorsa Basenjis
http://home1.gte.net/res0s12z/
The Trolls Nest - greenmen, goblins & gargoyle wall art
www.trollsnest.com


  #27  
Old November 18th 03, 05:52 AM
Christy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mile Sullivan" wrote in message
om...

You folks are a scary bunch. It's unfortunate that canine world has
been reduced to this. This is why these popular breeds are being bred
out of existance


Its clearly a waste of time to argue logically with you, so I won't bother,
but I'd love some clarification of the above sentence. How exactly can
popular breeds be bred out of existance? That is oxymoronic.

Christy


  #28  
Old November 21st 03, 06:10 AM
Lynn K.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

(Mile Sullivan) wrote in message . com...
You're a classic example of what I'm talking about. This big brother
(or in your case Big Sister attitude of co-ownership is ludicrous. Anyone who would sign such a contract is gullible and naive. It just
opens the door for some deranged breeder to decide she wants her dog
back and go after some unsuspecting, responsible dog owner for no good
reason at all.


Huh? Do you even understand the terms of many co-owner contracts? I
was offered one 3 weeks ago that would obligate the breeder to invest
$50-$100k in the dog's career. In most cases, they are for the
protection of the dog, not the breeder. But you are certainly free to
sign or not sign any contract that you don't think is mutually
beneficial. Just as you are free to get your dogs from whatever
source you like, whether or not you understand the goals of that
breeding program.


This is why these popular breeds are being bred
out of existance and people are being forced to make a crap shoot and
just buy from a pet store.


Huh, again? My breed is the most popular breed worldwide, GSDs, and I
can assure you we are hardly being bred out of existance, particularly
considering that the breed itself is just over 100 years old! OTOH,
pet stores that sell dogs really are a dying breed, thank heavens.

If you really want to have some kind of rational understanding of the
benefits and pitfalls of linebreeding/inbreeding, pick up a copy of
this month's AKC Gazette at Borders or B&N and read Pat Trotter's
article on this subject. Then ponder on why you wouldn't want a
limited or co-owner contract with someone like her, who is universally
recognized as the top breeder in her breed (Nor. Elkhounds). If she
didn't think a pup was of breeding quality and offered it on a limited
contract, do you really think your assessment of that pup's
breedability would be more informed? Or if she did offer a co-owned
show pup, where do you think you would get better mentoring and
advice? You may insist on the right to make your own mistakes and be
unwilling to have either kind of contract, but please recognize that
breeders also have every right to refuse to let you make those
mistakes with dogs they have bred.

Lynn K.
  #29  
Old November 22nd 03, 11:00 AM
Guess Wh@-- U got Mail.!!!
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

  #30  
Old November 22nd 03, 11:23 AM
Guess Wh@-- U got Mail.!!!
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 (Unauthorized Upgrade)
Copyright ©2004-2024 DogBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.