Sadly, it seems that those that are willing to do anything to win, including compromising their ethics are the ones that ultimately are the ones that get the breed adulations.
Last year I mentioned how a breeder that should know better bred two merles together, and got a blind and deaf double merle collie. This dog was the sire of last years BoB Rough Collie at Westminster, and a half brother to that dog was also in the ring. These people said how they have over 20 years in the breed, and all I can see is how they bred two merles and produces a blind, deaf, singleton pup (collies should have 8-10 pups in a litter) and then BRED this dog, even though there was no way for this dog to be CERFed.
And this person is one of the top Rough Collie people in the US.
I can find the same thing over and over again for Harlequin Great Dane breeders. The breed greats, those that should know better... And then they have rescue... They send their deaf and blind double merle puppies to a rescue, and these are supposed to be the creme de la creme. But how many times has it been said that reputable breeders dogs don't end up in rescue? they don't end up in shelters?
These peoples dogs do...
No, I am not being contradictory. I NO LONGER believe that show conformation is the end all and be all. I am fine that others still have that all consuming passion for it. It doesn't bother me. But when I know that the top breeders ARE doing detrimental breedings, when I know that they ARE dyeing dogs, and bleaching them, and nairing them, and powdering them, and oiling them, and tattooing eyelids and noses, I'm not going to be so naive as to say they are doing it for the betterment of the breed.
I'm not talking about fly by night people, I'm talking about the TOP breeders and producers in the country. Are all of them doing it? Of course not. BUT these top breeders are also the ones that usually have the money to campaign their falsely presented dogs all over the US, Canada, and even Mexico, then these poor conformational traits according to the standard are introduced to larger gene pool.
Those breeders that breed to exacting standards that are not able to widely campaign their dogs usually DO NOT have as great influence on the conformation show world, which is rampant with line/inbreed popular sire syndrome, which is a known problem in the purebred world.
Winning studs are the ones that are bred to, or their sons. And it depresses the gene pool. Which then allows the greater chance for recessive genes to pop up.
I have not given up my ideals, and I am not being contradictory. I just realized what is more important to me, and that is dogs that are healthy both structurally and genetically.
And I think you miss my point. I do not care if ears are up or down. I am saying that these breeders, "improving the breed", breeding to these "exacting standards", are ALSO taping ears, and going on to breed these dogs with naturally weak ears.
I'm not doing it, they are doing it, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of doing something like that then claiming you're improving the breed when the dog you bred that you know had weak ears goes on to be a top sire for some year or another after finishing.
I think you forgot one thing. I do not breed, I have no intentions of breeding. I really could care less what people breed, because I am not feeding their dogs. What I do care about is people breeding HEALTHY dogs as free from congenital defect as possible.
What I am pointing out is the contradictory language coming from breeders. Ear taping is a great example. Lots of breeds have their ears taped. GSDs have had their ears taped so long that the ear size in the SHOW shepherd is getting over large and the leather is getting thick, heavy and coarse. This is because some show breeder said, well, aside from the ear set, this puppy is good enough to win, and so "helped" nature out. And a bunch more followed.
Go on and have a look on the top GSD breeders site, all those puppies with their ears stuck together have had their ears glued in place because the breeder would not let the ear set naturally, or they knew the ear would not stand up, because of how thick, heavy and coarse the leather is. I didn't do it. I just see it, and I'm not afraid to comment on what I see, what EVERYONE sees, but they either chose to NOT see it, they chose to pretend it doesn't happen or they chose to not comment on it. But you bet ringside the gossip mongers are going like crazy talking all kinds of backstabbing smack.
That judge Gemy quoted is right, people should show not dogs that CAN finish, but dogs that SHOULD finish. But a number of people are showing dogs that CAN finish, not just those that should, and if they have enough money, they can influence the whole breed in a negative manner through the aforementioned popular sire syndrome.
Quote:
|
Either you breed by exacting standards and abide by them or you become one of those who accepts faults and the degrading of the standard as well as the health and welfare of the breed because it is easier and less expensive to sell pups that way.
|
I do not agree with this. This is my point, there is MORE than just this black and white, either or, good bad, false paradigm.
This is what some people are not getting, and the reason that the people that NEED to be taught are not listening.
Breeding out of standard dogs DOES NOT automatically equate to breed UNHEALTHY dogs. You have just tarred those breeders on this board that are breeding parti colors, and out of standard colors WITH THE SAME BRUSH as those who don't care about anything but the money they get from breeding.
After all, THEY are the ones that are accepting faults. Therefor they degrading the standard. Therefor they are degrading the health and welfare of the breed. Because it is easier and less expensive for them to sell puppies that way.
This is what YOU have said, not I.
What I am saying is I don't care if some people have decided that they do not wish to breed to a physical conformation standard. I do not believe that breeding outside of the standard automatically means that someone is degrading the breed, and I do not believe that it effects the health or temperament, SO LONG as the breeders are doing the appropriate tests for their dogs.
I especially feel this way since NOT breeding to an exacting conformational standard has not seemed to hurt the UKC field/working bred dogs of the same breeds as the AKC bench bred dogs. And before someone sniffs at the UKC, the AKC has accepted their stud books on several breeds for foundation stock service, and in fact, they PREDATE the AKC in use of DNA testing of stock. So obviously, the AKC doesn't feel as though the UKC is a substandard registry.
And I will say that the true breed stewards.. I respect them, and the time and effort they put into their breeds. It's admirable, and no one should take from this that I am looking down on their accomplishments.
I admire people like Gemy who have the moral strength and fortitude to do the RIGHT thing by their dogs and by their breed. I wish that MORE people were like that. Were All breeders like her, we wouldn't have the problems we have in the dog world today.
And I will end this by saying once again, I do not know the answer. Since I am not breeding, this doesn't affect me in any way, except as a buyer. It doesn't affect me in any way except as a dog lover.
But what I do know is this...
The people who are breeding substandard dogs are ALREADY OUT THERE BREEDING. Would it not be better that they at the VERY LEAST do genetic and structural testing on their breeding stock?
If we want to encourage people to do these things, you have to allow for the fact that there are those who do not care about conformation. It means nothing to them, be they a breeder or a buyer. But buyers do care about the health of their dogs, thus it's better to encourage these people, WHO ARE ALREADY BREEDING to be better breeders than to spit in their face and say just by the fact that they are breeding substandard dogs they are degrading the breed.
As SOON as you start insulting people, they do not want to listen, you have nothing to say that they want to hear. When these people who are already breeding stop listening, then WE cannot teach them. This is human psychology.
There are different ranks of breeders. TRUE breed stewards like Gemy are rare. Then you have the top breeders, a NUMBER of which would have bred Magic and Zoey. Then you have quality pet producers, then you have BYBers, then you have puppy millers. I may have missed a rank or two in there, but I can't think of any more.
The BYBers and puppy millers outproduce all of the rest of them... Wouldn't it be nice if we can move at least the BYBers up one rank? They don't see their dogs as livestock, nor are they usually warehousing their dogs, or being overtly cruel. Their dogs are usually pets, and they do usually care about their dogs. We can reach these people through education.
Yes it would be better that MORE people were like Gemy. But they are not, so how do we work with what we have and make them better breeders? How do we convince people to NOT breed their dogs or to breed better dogs?
I don't know the answer to this problem as a whole, but I do know the answer to those questions. You don't do it by insulting them.