http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2011/06/whos-your-double-merle-daddy.html

Thoughts?

Personally it makes me sick how much "color" is glorified in the show world.

This is one can of worms I don't want to touch. I'm better off just following along so I don't say something I'll regret. But I will say that breeding for color is what led to the multitude of health problems in Glory, I have nothing good to say about it.

I don't agree with it. You shouldn't breeder for anything that is going to be blind, cripple, or die young. But I don't think color is that important in breeds that don't ask for a certain color. I honestly see many more tri-colors and brown and white collies and shelties in the show ring and few merles (though I've only been to a few shows). It is more of that breeder's preference and I think BYB's put way more importance into color than show people. I saw that link posted a while back and the show sibe people I'm friends with on FB were all disgusted with it. I'm really glad there is no color restrictions for sibes in the standard. The Siberian Husky Club of America also doesn't recognize a merle colored sibe as purebred! I wish they would put that in the breed standard, but they probably didn't think it was necessary since the only way a sibe would be merle is if it was mixed with a different breed who had the genes for it.

I had to read on what this all meant....so sad for the dogs.... I'm learning so much about the breeding world that I had absolutely no clue! And I hear about so many bad/backyard breeders that I'm starting to wonder if reputable breeders are like finding a needle in a haystack?

I was watching the breed judging on the WKC website when this all erupted over the chat and there is also a HUGE discussion on my other forum about it.

A lot of people are actually blaming WKC and AKC for allowing it. These are also people who know little to nothing of the show world though. I feel that the breed club should be taking a stand on this especially - but I've heard that they have their own internal problems going on right now and this is just adding to it.

I just cannot fathom reasoning with myself to create a MM just to be able to create pretty Merle puppies. In what sense of the word is that ethical?

I know some of you show but I just can't understand the thought process behind this. I thought confirmation was about quality, soundness, and structure. How can these people live with themselves knowing that they purposely created a deformed dog just so he would only throw puppies of a certain color?

There are always bad apples in everything. I actually don't totally agree with a couple of the sibe breeders near me. One produces amazing sibes. He really knows how to breed nice ones. But he keeps his dogs and puppies in kennels and I could really tell his puppies didn't get enough attention when I saw them at a dog show. For one, he keeps his puppies until they are about 5 months old, which is fine if you are trying to decide which one you want to keep, but from listening to him, it was very clear he had him mind set about a few of the ones that would not be show quality. I have no clue why he hadn't placed them already and instead let them grow up in a kennel instead of with a new family in a household environment. Him and his wife are professional handlers, so I do think they have gotten a little too caught up in showing and have lost some values every dog breeder should have.

But then there are those breeders who keep a limit on how many dogs they own and usually those few are such a part of the family they sleep on the bed at night! I found out one lady I know actually got a tattoo of her first sibe on her hip! And her dogs are so spoiled! So you can find the best and the worst in almost everything.

I was glad that one of the big time AKC guys and long time show breeder said in one of his lectures I attended that no breeder should ever breed something that will be deaf, blind, or crippled and pushed that message again and again. Though I found it a bit ironic since he is a GSD breeder and you know how those look now. So there are good people out there, even within AKC.

Though one thing to keep in mind, that dog would have probably been disqualified from the ring if he was ever shown (all those awards were for his offspring, not him) because I'm pretty sure the judge would be able to tell he was blind. After the down and backs the judge tries to get the dog's attention to see their ear set and expression. I have a feeling that dog would have failed to look at the judge.

http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2012/02/westminster-rewards-cruelty.html

I think that's a bit better of an article than the other one - but they all say the same thing.

They can live with themselves because they're scum of the earth people. =/

And what it comes down to is breeder ethics. A lot of what Aiden's (Wyndlair Avalanche) breeders say is all a bunch of contradictory BS in my opinion. Wyndlair isn't even willing to admit that Aiden is blind and deaf and from my understanding in that article - he isn't even a good example of the standard.

In many other clubs - you CANNOT register or even breed a MM dog.

"Our decision to do a merle-to-merle breeding was the result of a couple years of frustration in not being able to find a quality non-merle stud dog that had the temperament, health, soundness, pedigree and breed type that we work to maintain in our breeding program."

That seems like BS to me. Really? You couldn't find just one?! Out of all the collies. But you somehow produced this amazing one with just one litter where only one puppy survived?! But it was so simple for you, all the other breeders must be idiots and terrible at breeding. BTW, they could have used a non-merle to breed to the merles they used and probably would have gotten a nice merle out of it without creating a MM and puppies that couldn't develop due to the MM genes.

I told you what he says is BS!!!

No doubt there are bad apples, it just irritates the shit out of me that his offspring won best in breed at westminster or whatever. Rewarding their selfish and stupid decision.

Although to be fair, I'll admit I'm very anti-AKC and the whole confirmation thing is dumb to me (no offence, guys!) IMO, dogs should be bred to facilitate function, not looks. The American GSD is not functional. Many confirmation herding breed dogs lack the motivation and drive they were bred to have. Some of these small breed dogs unable to breathe correctly under physical exercise or overheat easily by simply being carried... That's not functional in any sense of the word. I feel that the need and desire for a dog with certain looks or a certain this or that is clouding their vision and steering them off course of the original goal. These are first and foremost living entities, not equations to be manipulated to produce pretty dogs with a certain ear set or coloring pattern. But that's my little soapbox on the issue as a whole.

To be fair I could point you to a very awesome GSD person who I spend a lot of time talking with and I've spoken at length abouth the breed with - and many of those GSDs can in fact work and do work. She works her Germans in herding and shows them. Not all the showline GSDs lack the drive needed to perform their original function and I will agree that to a point it does look like they wouldn't be able to herd - per their standard a dog that walks like some of the showline GSDs is correct because they would be able to cover more ground more efficiently. (I by no means agree with this it is simply what I've learned)

The dog for conformation is bred to look (structurally) as though it could do the job it was originally bred for compared to the standard.

To breed for a color specifically is unethical and to claim as a breeder that you have rare colors is a huge red flag.

I've also noticed from talking with several people who own brachy breeds - from a reputable AKC breeder their dogs have no problems breathing or performing. Now that's not to say that of you ran the dog 10 miles in 90 degree weather they wouldn't have problems - but I know several people with pugs and bulldogs who can run circles around bigger dogs.

I think when someone has a really bad taste in their mouth for something it is really easy to pick out all of the bad things - but it takes time to realize that not everything is so bad or as bad as others make it out to be. I will admit that there are a lot of breeds that have problems and I am not blind to this so please don't think I am defending the AKC or those breeds because this all stuff I found out by talking to people.

ETA: I also know that among many of the breeds that are "trouble" (breeds that everyone harps on) breeds there are people within those breeds trying to get things changed. It just takes a lot of time. And the problem does not solely fall upon breeders, but upon the parent clubs and more specifically judges.

Sorry this is all over the place it's from my phone hope it makes some sense.

Truth is, it's just not my thing. On the other hand I'm sure people question (or would) why I have (or would want) 5 poorly bred Siberians who have genetic problems and structural flaws.

I could argue that the GSD breed as a whole is declining in quality in this country and less are being used for work. Sure, some may work their GSDs in trials or competitions but they're really being phased out in real life work situations such as police work or narc dogs. I just can't see how having hips that close to the ground is a benefit, nor something someone would desire.

I just know where there is 1 breeder who does produce very good quality healthy dogs, there are others who are still considered reputable who don't. Just as while there are reputable rescues that work to save dogs left and right, there are snob rescues who turn down potential homes left and right.

Everyone has their own thing . If I had the funds/space I know I would in fact have a bunch of rescue Siberian's but I also know I would have AT LEAST one show Siberian. But I also have huge plans for the future down the road to be very involved in the Siberian Husky breed and to help research for their diseases.

Well for arguments sake

If you're going to argue the GSD breed as a whole is being phased out in real life working situations- I could argue that almost ANY breed is being phased out for what it was originally bred for because we just have no need for them in this era to be anything other than companion animals. Great Pyrenees and almost every other LGD are very rarely used to guard (even though there are places that would greatly benefit from their use). At least around here - German's are still being used for police work. Hell - they just successfully cloned 5 puppies from a SAR GSD that had passed away. I do know that in other areas like the midwest the prefer Belgian Mals and Dutches over the Germans.

But to argue that GSD's as a whole being phased out is to also say that Siberian's and Malamutes are being phased out - and in truth they're probably being phased out more/faster than the other breeds at their specific job. Alaskan Huskies are taking over the planet!!!!!! ahhhhhhhhhhh

Quote :

I just know where there is 1 breeder who does produce very good quality healthy dogs, there are others who are still considered reputable who don't. Just as while there are reputable rescues that work to save dogs left and right, there are snob rescues who turn down potential homes left and right.

But you could say that really for anything. It's a shame what people are willing to do - and it really showcases what humanity has come to.

I used to be really not involved in dogs at all - rescue, showing, kennel clubs etc. But out of curiosity I still went and looked up everything because it's nice to know . Just like I'll never own a GSD but I still took the time to talk to someone who works with and handles them just to see it from a breeder/owner/handler's point of view. Know what I mean?

No, you misunderstood me. Over the past 5-10 yearS our police department has begun to phase out GSDs and replace them with Mals. I believe Miami Dade has done the same. In a lot of PP work I see being done as well as dogs being trained for it, GSDs are seen less and less with Mals being more prevalent. The narc dogs used bathe Feds (who walk them by the dog park near us( used to have all GSDs a while back, now the majority are Mals. HD is pretty much a given with all of the GSDs you see in rescue aswellas temperament problems galore. While not all these issues may be seen "in the show circuit" it's still the breed, and it's still a growing problem showing the decline in the quality of the breed.

Quote :

No, you misunderstood me. Over the past 5-10 yearS our police department has begun to phase out GSDs and replace them with Mals. I believe Miami Dade has done the same. In a lot of PP work I see being done as well as dogs being trained for it, GSDs are seen less and less with Mals being more prevalent. The narc dogs used bathe Feds (who walk them by the dog park near us( used to have all GSDs a while back, now the majority are Mals. HD is pretty much a given with all of the GSDs you see in rescue aswellas temperament problems galore. While not all these issues may be seen "in the show circuit" it's still the breed, and it's still a growing problem showing the decline in the quality of the breed.

My apologies! I did misunderstand. And I do agree with you that the quality of the breed is diminishing (Breeders within the breed also feel this way and are working to try and change things). But to be honest - I do know that even show quality GSD's have temperament issues also. I will say that a GSD can and will stand four-square - and I have learned that no one really knows why they take on the stand/stack that they do (I asked ). But! The stack is natural to the dogs also from my understanding and is no way an indicator of HD within that dog and the dog isn't in any pain from it.

(Like I said this is all what I've heard from my friend! I don't ever plan on having a GSD or getting into the breed lol)

When someone can tell me why this is not the way they should look...



But THIS is....


....

That's a little extreme, IMO! There's no way that it's healthy or natural. Regardless of how they stack, I can guarantee that the dog in the first picture is probably more healthy and functional.

(I don't know either of these dogs, simply using them as comparison.)

I really really hate how they stack GSD's! I heard once that it was to help show off their movement. Like standing still is really helping to show off how they move. They really don't look nearly as bad if they are stacked normally like ever other breed (I watched the breed judging for them online and tried to stop it several times when they were starting to stack their dog, but hadn't put that one leg forward yet). But they seem to be breeding bulkier ones too. Bigger heads and such. As for covering more ground, I guess you could say they do, but they waste a lot of energy doing it. With siberians a flying trot is a no-no. It may look fancy to people, but the higher their feet come off the floor, the more needless energy they are wasting picking up their legs too high.

But the few GSD people I've met do seem to care a lot about HD and often import dogs to help avoid american ones with bad HD.

As most of you know I am very active in rescue and see breeding, even quote "responsible breeding", as a major cause in pet over population and therefore extremely high euthanasia rates. We have 1200 to 1500 commercial breeders in the state of Oklahoma alone.

I will also say that this goes to show kennel clubs (by recognizing these dogs) are in it to make money and nothing else. They are not and never will be in my mind proponents of animal welfare.

Like I said - from my understanding the stack is very natural to the dogs and they stop and stack like that on their own (maybe not to the degree that some people have it in the show ring but they do). Even though! We're used to square dogs so it makes sense for us to go "EWWW THAT DOG IS TEH POOP LOOKING! LOOK AT HOW IT STANDS!"

The slope in the back is to create the angulation of the rear which is to be near 90 degrees per the standard.
"The whole assembly of the thigh, viewed from the side, is broad, with both upper and lower thigh well muscled, forming as nearly as possible a right angle. "


See, now, Kristina I gave the same argument when speaking with my GSD friend. She showed me pictures and videos of show dogs and I asked her why some GSD's are walking basically on their hocks. And she said that while they shouldn't be doing that because it is not a weight-baring area - they do it because per the standard it's correct - as the dog in a working situation - would be able to cover more ground per his/her gait than a dog walking on their pads. (She also made sure to tell me she doesn't agree with that type of movement. especially as any fault of movement/gait should be considered a SERIOUS fault. Same for temperament)

So I asked her then what the difference would be down the road - meaning why have a dog that for that moment could cover more ground but only herd well for 5 years as opposed to having a dog that while he can't cover as much ground as the other he could herd well his entire life. She basically told me that because they (breed club?) put so much emphasis on the movement within the breed that it doesn't matter. (also not something she supports)

I once was told or read that people start with a type that is "normal", and then there will always be those few judges that reward a more "extreme" type so people start breeding for that because they're winning. Well eventually that "extreme" from before becomes the "normal" because everyone is breeding to what is winning. But there will always be those few judges that reward the "most extreme" - and because they're winning the cycle just keeps continuing - that holds especially true for German Shepherds.

But simply because the way the dog stacks (free or otherwise) doesn't mean that they have HD - and from what I know - the dogs aren't in any real pain at that time. Now the really extreme dogs will most likely have arthritis as they get older.

Quote :

As most of you know I am very active in rescue and see breeding, even quote "responsible breeding", as a major cause in pet over population and therefore extremely high euthanasia rates. We have 1200 to 1500 commercial breeders in the state of Oklahoma alone.

Just out of curiosity - because this argument comes up a lot on my other forums - people saying that responsible breeding is part of the problem. How so? A reputable and responsible breeders dogs are not ending up in shelters taking up a kennel for another dog? They're only having a couple litters per year that are already placed in homes before they're even born and IF something were to happen to the family that got that puppy per the contract the breeder gets that puppy back.

In fact - many many responsible and reputable breeders are very active in rescue. A Siberian Breeder and a few others in the area that I know and have spoken with personally made a Siberian Husky Rescue in the area up here.

That isn't to say though that there are unethical and pretty sour people in the world who would rather just dump that puppy in a shelter than return the dog. But I've heard of and know of many breeders that will drive anywhere to get one of their puppies if it ends up in a shelter.

I very much support rescue and adoption but I wouldn't place blame on responsible/reputable breeders who do anything and everything within their power to ensure that their puppies do not end up in shelters/rescues.

If you're to place blame look at all of the Amish people breeding willy nilly and all of the dog auctions, and to the puppy mills that house hundreds and hundreds of dogs with no care for their wellbeing and then to the people who breed their dogs simply because they're "cute". But I think it is quite wrong to blame people who are trying their best to help fund research for their breed to help ensure their health and to help find the causes and cures for genetic diseases.

You can't paint EVERY breeder of every breed with the same brush because of a few bad apples. IMO.

Niraya wrote:

You can't paint EVERY breeder of every breed with the same brush because of a few bad apples. IMO.

1200 to 1500 in Oklahoma alone and it's not a problem? Even with a couple of litters a year (which I doubt) that 5 (puppies/litter) * 2 (times a year) * 1500 = 15,000 animals * 50 (states) that's 750,000 animals a year. That's a lot of dogs that could have been adopted from shelters or rescues. You can say it is not a breeding issue but the numbers don't lie and these are probably conservative because it doesn't include BYB and puppy mills just known commercial breeders.

Yes, I've pulled register dogs from kill shelters and lots of purebreds that weren't registered. I've rescued dogs from breeders going out of business.

Oh also I haven't know hardly any breeders that microchip their dogs in order to truly locate what happens to them and save them from death in a shelter.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean by a "commercial" breeder? Because from my understanding that is someone who breeds solely for money and making a profit, no?

If we're on the same page than those are far from "responsible" breeders. I know breeders leave a sour taste in many if not all of those who do the rescuing - but to me it just sounds like your idea of "responsible" (which sounds like no breeder, no offense) and my idea of "responsible" are two different things.

From my understanding - you can only have one person's contact information on a chip? Please correct me if I'm wrong. At least that's what I was told when I got Bella chipped. But even if a breeder chipped their puppies the information would be changed to the new families when they got the puppy which still wouldn't allow the puppy to be found by the breeder if it ended up in a shelter. That's going off of what I was told about only having one person's information on the chip though.

I can tell you that coming from PA we are one of the worst places for Puppy mills. I know all too well about the problem.

You are highlighting my problem! This obsession with looks (the angular way they "should" be on their hind end) is what is creating this atrocity of a breed. A dog who "works" for 5 years and then would need to retire due to pain/arthritis/joint problems is NOT a healthy sound dog. There are ABCA Border Collies who are 10+ that are fully functional and healthy. A dog bred to perform its function should not need to retire at 5 years old. That is a flaw that we people have created by breeding for this look. You look at some of these imports and it's like looking at a different breed. Regardless of whatever person is breeding whatever... 5 years at work shouldn't break a dog. That is a serious problem. The god of all that is breeds didn't come down and state that this dog must have 90 degree angles. That is humans being stupid humans. Dogs should be bred to conform to a standard while maintaining workability and function as well as good structure and health. This is not what we're breeding for in the AKC, IMO.

Oh I completely agree with you there Kristina! I have a problem with that as well. I don't think it's proper and I really don't agree with the "Well as long as the dog can cover more ground NOW it doesn't matter if it can't even move in 8 years". I think it is a shame and I agree that it isn't a healthy sound dog at all and things need to be changed.

My understanding is there are several breeders who are (and have been?) trying to work to fix what is happening to GSDs. But there isn't enough yet to make a difference and it's going to take a lot of time.

I don't know much about the ABCA. Just about the only thing I know is that they don't allow AKC registered BC's to be registered. But those are the "real" working dogs in the ABCA.

Now I will return in a few I'm going to go brush out Bella

ABCA strives for workability and function as well as health. Dogs must be clear of CEA and clear hips (elbows too, I believe) AKC registered BCs cannot apply for ABCA registration and if an ABCA registered dog applies for AKC registration, ABCA registration is revoked. The AKC has really done a number on Border Collies. I don't even want to get on that tangent!

The reason why things are so difficult to turn around in the GSD world (at least in the show ring) is because these people want to win and they want to make more puppies that win. Breeding for a more structurally sound and efficient dog is nice, but not nice enough for people to stop breeding these mutants. Because its the mutants who are winning. Don't get me wrong, I love GSDs. We grew up with them. My grandparents bred working farm GSDs for a long time. But what they have become in the AKC is a disgrace...

Anyway, to get back to the main point... Looks aren't everything. A dog or a breeds workability shouldn't be destroyed because it makes it more appealing. If that's the road that breeders are going down (Merles are more popular, judges like that look more) I don't want any part of it. That shouldn't be something an ethical breeder or any "reputable" breeder is willing to sacrifice.