[Britster]

Originally Posted by PennysMum

I agree that there should be a bottom weight. I work in an animal hospital, and we just see way too many issues in the super-tiny dogs. For the AKC to validate that by putting no lower limit on weight is really irresponsible.

In my opinion, whenever somebody breeds a dog to a standard that does not allow them to live healthy lives in a way that dogs are designed to live, there is something ethically wrong with what they are doing. They are animals, not toys, and we shouldn't feel like we can warp them in whatever way we feel like when what we are doing does not allow them the vitality that they need to live the life of a dog. Breeding dogs too tiny is just one example. Humans have bred English Bulldogs such that they can't even deliver a litter of pups without a c-section. Humans bred for a sloping back in German Shepherds because we thought that it looked nice, and produced generations of dogs with serious hip and spinal issues. Humans thought pugs looked cute with deeply wrinkled, squished-up faces, and wound up with some little dogs who can barely breathe, and will sometimes die because of it when placed in "extreme" conditions that more hardy dogs can handle without blinking, and that develop painful skin infections in the folds in their face.

Just because the breed standard says something doesn't mean that it is OK.

Good post!