lappielover

This is as simple as I can say it. Health testing is great and I never said, nor implied, not to do it. But health testing is like trying to close the barn door after the horse is out. The goal should be to breed dogs in such a way that inherited diseases do not become common in our breeds. The kennel club breeding system, from it's very starting point of the meaning of purebred which means all dogs in any breed must be, all related to each other usually from a very small founder population, no new genetics brought in, constant use of inbreeding (there is no choice even if you do not want to inbreed), closed stud books and popular sire (and you can link this to showing if you like) effect. All need major review and updating how we do things. I think you've expressed the whole purebred situation in a nutshell with this statement, Shortstep. ( A very difficult thing to do, by the way!! :D )

A controlled outcross is not the answer for every disease in every breed, but it certainly could be the answer for many of the diseases in many breeds. That is the real point and not that it may not work for some disease. What I find really frustrating is even in the case of the Dalmatian, where the work has been done and successfully, most breeder would rather breed dogs with disease than use a dog with a cross some 10-13 or more generations ago and prevent the disease in their dogs. It boggles the mind. Personally I think any breeder who refuses to bring the healthy genes into their Dals should be banned. I guess it will take the RSPCA to make it a welfare issue and get a government law made first. It may take a new generation of dog breeders to effect some of the needed changes. I just hope that breeding for 'breeds' is not totally banned by then and that most breeds are not already lost or are too far gone before we start to see the needed changes happen. Just want to say I totally agree with your comments Shortstep. It's so refreshing to hear from someone who can see the "big picture" of what is happening with purebred dog breeding. Thank you.

I can't explain it further, lappie, because that quote is not from me. Lol! My apologies! thanks for pointing out my error.

"Show ring judges should and do place health as an extremely important aspect of judging pedigree dogs". Mita, could you please explain this further - in what ways do you think judges ascertain the health of a dog in the show ring? I realize they check bites and make decisions about whether a dog's conformation is satisfactory. They also check for two testicles on a male dog. In what other ways do you think they determine the health status of an individual dog?

Actually, I think there was some mention of how the situation will not improve "until the show ring starts placing health above looks". Something along those lines anyway. Just my humble opinion, but I do think it's about time that the show ring was revised to include provision for health in some way or another, rather than just rewarding "type" - or at least, an indivdual's idea of type. What many people forget too is that every breed was intially highly inbred to establish the breed's particular characteristics. It could be justified to some extent when breeds were established, but I don't believe it can be justified further along in a breed's evolution.