Pedigreed Dogs

[NeonLightChild]

Pedigree Dogs Exposed (http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=44215931)

WARNING: it's an hour long.

ABC Nightline (http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=7064046) did a clip on show dogs not too long after.

Pedigree Dogs Exposed was aired on the BBC back in August 2008 and while the effects it's had so far are limited to those who've kept up with the problem, I think the documentary needs to be seen by all dog people. I'm not a breeder and never want to be, unless I learn my working lines and breed dogs worthy for police work, but that is a lot different than breeding for looks.

If you have a slow connection or want to pull a TL;DW, here's the main point: Pedigree dogs in the UK who are registered with the Kennel Club (same thing with the AKC here in the US) are bred solely for looks, so they are able to compete in Crufts. Because only registered dogs can be bred to each other, the gene pool is closed to new bloodlines and while the number of dogs registered seems like enough to go around, in the show world only the best is bred to the best. Basically, the eugenics principle along with a hefty shameless dose of incest that breeders themselves condemn in humans, but somehow it's 'different' and 'OK' for dogs.

Unfortunately it seems to affect breeds people love the most:

-English bulldogs, who can no longer mate or give birth naturally and has a lengthy list of health problems related mostly to its body shape and how it has been bred down over the past century

-Again, English bulldogs, Boston terriers, Pugs, Pekingese, Shih-tzus, Boxers (to some extent) that are considered "brachycephalic" in that they have little to no muzzle: their nasal passages are so pushed into their faces that they can have low heat tolerance, snorting, snoring, as well as eye problems since their eyes are out in front of the face rather than the muzzle.

-Most large breeds are plagued with hip and shoulder dysplasia, as well as cancer. While the large size of the dog doesn't help, these joint conditions are hereditary and can be avoided by appropriate testing and simply NOT BREEDING dogs whose hips are scored below a certain grade. (By the way, most breeders in the PDE documentary scoff at the idea of testing...it is simply below them to think that someone else might know the business of breeding better than they!)

-Certain breeds are emphasized for how they have changed over the years, usully for the worse: the Basset hound is too heavy and low to the ground, the Neopolitan mastiff is a mass of flews and drool, the fox terrier's chest is now too big to fit into a fox sette, and the show German Shepherd has no control over it's hind legs, causing it to sink in the back end.

All in the name of "breed standard." Nowhere here is there any mention of "working standard" or even a test to see if the dog is mentally and physically fit for the job it was first bred to do. (I understand some organizations do hold competitions for this, but it is optional, more of a "fun" thing for most people, and some of those dogs are never bred. Kind of defeats the purpose.) Even pet insurance companies understand the problems of purbreds, and your premium goes up if you have one, even moreso if it's a large breed. Mixed-breeds/Mutts can be insured for much less, and that's even if you choose to follow that route.

I'm posting this here mostly just so people can see it ebcause I think it needs more publicity than what it currently gets. If you do have any experience with a pedigreed dog having an obvious genetic defect (general health counts too, not just looks! remember we're passing bad genes back and forth with no new blood) or even just have a general reaction/question about this, post it!

Additional readings that are very relevant:
From Rosettes to Ruin (http://www.terrierman.com/rosettestoruin.htm)
A dog food company is actually encouraging brachycephalic breeding by making a special food (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2009/05/dog-food-for-deformed-dogs.html) for them
What the AKC has been up (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2009/05/all-at-sea-at-akc.html) to in the midst of all this

[LV426]

Nothing like a good old mutt.

[WhiteHowlerGalliard]

I think, and it may sound a bit radical, but I think that dog shows are sanctioned animal cruelty. they breed these dogs to suffer, and they get awarded for it! I really don't think they care about the dogs, because if they did, they'd realize that it's a horrible thing, to condemn a life to a truly painful end.

I'm sure they don't think twice about putting their dogs down, either.

Although I will be happy if I stand corrected.

I agree that mutts are the best way to go. Some mutts are so cute and beautiful, but are overlooked because they're not a "real" breed. It really does anger me.

[NeonLightChild]

I'm sure they don't think twice about putting their dogs down, either.

Although I will be happy if I stand corrected.


The Rhodesian ridgeback breeders have no qualms against culling puppies that aren't born with out a ridge, because that is a defining characteristic of the breed. Until recently in the US, same with Boxers with white covering more than one third of their entire body, which is why you're seeing an explosion of white Boxers. That plus people are starting to intentionally breed for them because they're "rare" or something like that. (Not to mention that they have more sensitivities and allergies too!)

There's the same thing with Rottweilers that have long hair as well as red Rotties. They're not so common as to be culled, but simply because they are not common, it's not unheard of for an unethical breeder to capitalize on these "rare" Rotties, never mind it's a genetic fluke that throws back to when they were bred for purpose, not for looks. It was only when the breed standard was written and the black and rust colors became canon that those characteristics were suddenly frowned upon.

I agree, mutts and mixed breeds are the way to go. Even the so-called "designer breeds," while I hate the marketing and hype over such mixes, are a better choice and people are STILL unwilling to acquire something unpedigreed for whatever asinine reason.

[Lord Anubis]

I myself am a Lab man. I will pay for the proper breeding. I love my Black and Chocolate.

[Tempest]

I myself am a Lab man. I will pay for the proper breeding. I love my Black and Chocolate.

I hope you actually read this thread.

My current dog, a standard poodle named Evvy, has Addison's disease. This is a disease that's relatively common in poodles. It can occur at any time in the dogs life and it's thought to be inherited.

Basically what happens is the dog's adrenal glands (located above the kidneys) shrink, which is thought to be caused by an autoimmune reaction (this is where your body begins to fight its own cells). The adrenal glands produce and release a few extremely important hormones, and when the dog's adrenal glands begin to shrink, these hormones are no longer produced in adequate amounts. The disease progresses very slowly until the dog has what's known as an Addisonian crisis/crash and the situation becomes life threatening. The dog stops eating, becomes lethargic, urinates a lot, shows signs of depression and weakness and/or vomits.

This is exactly what I went through with Evvy, but luckily the vet was able to diagnose her in time. Some owners do not bring the dog in to the vet quickly enough, or the vet can't diagnose the dog properly (the symptoms are common among other illnesses) and it dies. I was lucky that Evvy survived, but it's a lot of work to have a dog with Addison's disease.

She takes a steroid pill every morning, which helps supress her immune system so she stops attacking her own adrenal glands, but this makes her more suseptible to infections (which she gets--frequently--so she's almost always on antibiotics, too). She also needs to go to the vet for a monthly checkup and blood work to make sure her medicines are still working. By the way, the meds are expensive. Plus, because she often suffers from a loss of appetite from the disease, she has become extremely picky and will only eat dry dog food mixed with wet, and sometimes she won't even eat that.

The ironic thing is that Evvy's parents were award-winning show dogs and were from the most reputable poodle breeders in the state. I don't know for sure if this was the breeder's fault or not, but I know that it's possible for breeders to reduce the risk of Addison's disease through careful breeding. So yeah, be careful if you choose to buy purebreds. Even the more reputable breeders can turn out dogs with serious health problems.

[Lord Anubis]

thats why i do my research. you never just look at the parents. it is best to back atleast 4 or 5 generations. and if they are a repitable breeder they will have that information.

[NeonLightChild]

A purebred for pet purposes is going to have more issues with it, but you're right Anubis, when you have a good breeder who has health info, pedigrees and such going back for all of their dogs (it'd be nice if you could see same on puppies, if owners managed to keep in touch too), you stand a good chance of getting a healthier dog.

I do like the purebreds that have a purpose though. When I get a dog for Schutzhund or protection/K-9 work, it will most likely be either a Belgian Malinois or a well-bred German Shepherd (not one of those shitty things you see walking around the show ring (http://www.asuperiorgsd.com/p2p.html) with no hind end). Working dogs, even the K-9s you see working with your police department, tend to have much more stringent health testing because they actually have a job to do. (The AKC thinks that the show dogs do too (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2006/08/shitzhund-work-at-akc.html), unfortunately.) Otherwise, for a pet dog I am more than happy to go for a mixed-breed, although I'm also a fan of greyhounds too...

[Lord Anubis]

Thats exactly why I want many generations of parents back. If there is gonna be a health risk it will usually show up. Nothing is guarenteed of course but you will have a great idea. Plus I just am a sucker for a lab. puppy or adult.

[Chiron Jackal]

(not one of those shitty things you see walking around the show ring (http://www.asuperiorgsd.com/p2p.html) with no hind end)

:eek: My god, you're right.

http://www.asuperiorgsd.com/p2p.imgs/p2p.066.png

Where the hell did it's ass go!?

[Lord Anubis]

Part of that is the pose but the American German Shepard has the sloped ass end. Dosen't look right does it...

[Chiron Jackal]

Part of that is the pose but the American German Shepard has the sloped ass end. Dosen't look right does it...

No it does not.

And while you're right that some of it is the pose, the pose doesn't appear to have changed too much over the years, but the lack of ass has grown.

... Why do people pose their dogs to emphasize a lack of ass?

[Lord Anubis]

I have no idea. As much as I love my Black and Choc labs I would never compete them in any type of events. They are my buddies,,pals ect...Shit they eat better than i do

[NeonLightChild]

... Why do people pose their dogs to emphasize a lack of ass?

I'm wondering why other dogs get to be shown all squared up on 4 legs, and then the poor German Shepherd has to be freakin' stretched out like that. The pose pretty much has been there over the years, but like everything else we love, it's been exaggerated to the point of sheer "WTF!"

Then again, I'm wondering too why most dogs get to be shown looking like dogs and not like a freakin' My Little Pony. Heck, even in the old days, the poor Poodle wasn't allowed to look much like a real dog...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v133/dogs84/oldpoodles.jpg
(That's a great site (http://www.messybeast.com/history/history.htm) by the way, and has some wonderful pictures on how dogs used to look in the mid- to late-19th century as well as other great historical photos.)

Then again, it's all a sick inbred beauty pageant anyway; some of those show dogs have more salon and hair products used on them than I use on myself!

[Lord Anubis]

It has to do with what the "bread" standards are set up by some idiot.

[NeonLightChild]

(Psst, it's "breed." Just a pet peeve of mine when people spell it "bread," and apparently I'm not the only one (http://pure-bread-dogs.livejournal.com/)...it just makes the dog sound like it's is a mix of Pup and Pumpernickel.)

[Lord Anubis]

that was more of a typo but your right breed

[BlasphemousHeart]

I agree with the mutt comment.... Big Pitti fan too

[Lord Anubis]

I am getting ready to breed my female choc Lab this summer.....can't wait to see what colored pups come out.....i want a yellow to keep

[NeonLightChild]

If you know the color (and HEALTH!) genetics of the stud as well as your bitch, you should have a good idea of what to expect. Remember that yellow is recessive, but since you said you'd pay good money for good breeding, I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir on this.

[Vendetta]

... Why do people pose their dogs to emphasize a lack of ass?
Wait, are you serious? Why do people do ANY of the arbitrary things that they think make themselves look better? Because one day someone decided this looked "good" and a bunch of other people picked up on it and started doing it.

[WolfPup]

My friend sent me the link to that almost right after it came out. Honestly, I couldn't sit and watch it all, it just made me sick to see what people are doing to their dogs and yet sitting back saying some of these "dogs" are "beautiful".

Tho, I don't really need a video, or even this thread, to tell me about the problems of pure breed dogs. My friend is a Vet Tech, and has been for almost 5 years now, and has told me almost weekly of problems of certain dog breeds that come into her clinic, and how DUMB the owners are with their dogs...Yet don't care cause they have a "Pure Breed". It's almost like some people don't give a shit about wanting a dog as a family pet or whatever, but want them to brag and show off how much they paid for their dog. That just sickens me.

[NeonLightChild]

Registration with a kennel club means NOTHING in terms of health, breeding potential, or possible show points. It's just proof that your dog is a purebred. Hell, the AKC itself even said that it would register a blind, deaf, three-legged purebred pup with green fur and hip dysplasia because "AKC, unfortunately, does not mean quality." No idea on where the Kennel Club stands on this, but judging from the case of George in the video, it's probably about the same. (By the way, if you want to see more of the hideous German Shepherds, here's more video (http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/1791/pedigree-dogs-exposed-filmmaker-releases-extended-footage-of-german-shepherds/) that wasn't put into the documentary!)

You may not need a video and neither do I (or probably a good number of people on this board), but there are those who are blind to everything but beauty and pedigrees and ribbons, not to mention the dogs themselves. (As an aside, it's said that a number of dog trainers leave the business not because of the dogs, but because of the sheer IDIOTS they have for owners...I imagine one day I'll go the same way after some time.)

I'm going into vet tech pretty soon myself, by the way...between that and training, I'll hopefully occupy myself in good ways.

[Chiron Jackal]

Registration with a kennel club means NOTHING in terms of health, breeding potential, or possible show points. It's just proof that your dog is a purebred. Hell, the AKC itself even said that it would register a blind, deaf, three-legged purebred pup with green fur and hip dysplasia because "AKC, unfortunately, does not mean quality."
I clenched my jaw with rage when I read that. If I hadn't been eating a sammich at the time, TC would be missing a portion of tongue.

There any sort of comparable organization that does care?

[NeonLightChild]

There any sort of comparable organization that does care?


Kinda sorta...it's all about money really, but several new registries have sprung up, such as the Continental Kennel Club (http://www.continentalkennelclub.com/), the National Pedigree Certification Registry (http://www.myspace.com/451213668), and the America's Pet Registry (http://www.aprpets.org/page.php?3).

The good thing is, they are open systems where new genes can be introduced and the pet can still be sold and registered as a purebred. The bad thing is, they are open systems where most dogs are registered through a picture (to show that the dog actually looks like the breed it's supposed to be) and at least with the CKC, two witness signatures are needed to say that other people think so too. So if a dog is a mixed breed that looks more like one parent (say, a Dalmatian-Pointer cross that still is white with black spots), that dog can still be registered as a Dal because it looks like one. [There actually was a fiasco with that mix (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2002/12/dalmatian-club-embraces-purity-and-pain.html), but with the AKC! Here's more details about that (http://www.dalmatianheritage.com/about/schaible_research.htm) from a group that actually cares about the breed.] So the new registries are pretty much double-edged swords: you can buy a 'registered' dog at full price from the breeder, but again, quality is an issue because no registry really cares about or does any health testing (things like OFA and CERF stuff is all up the breeder to do) and you might not get what completely you are paying for too.

[Bigskippy]

I only discovered this forum last night but decided to throw my hat into the ring anyway.

I grew up with German Shepards. My father was a bodyguard so they were bred for security work. They had huge shoulders, were almost 6 feet long when standing on hind legs and were built for explosive power. Unfortunately they all suffered from bad hips and their back ends had a habit of giving way. They rarely survived past 8 years old.

Animal husbandry is a bad, bad thing. It can lead to all sorts of horrific congenital deseases and general poor health. It started hundreds of years ago before we knew better. You'd think we would have learnt our lesson by now.

Most breeders cant tell a healthy dog from the arse end of a bus. Everything they learned they picked up from books written by other 'expert' breeders, or by picking up 'tips' at dog shows. They dont live with the dogs. They dont have lasting relationships with the dogs. As far as they are concerned the dogs are medals or trophies to be shown about to make them look good.

My advice is, don't feed the breeders. There are thousands upon thousands of dogs at your local animal shelters who could use a good home. My current dog is from a shelter. She's my best friend and I wouldn't change her for the world. She had all sorts of behavioural issues when she came to me as she had been abused in her former home. It was hard work getting her to settle in, but it just made our relationship all the more rewarding.

The ironic thing is, she's a German Shepard too and she's every bit as smart and well behaved as those dogs who were bred for their job. She makes a brilliant guard/attack dog and I have no doubt in my mind that she could win any show I put her into.

[NeonLightChild]

Many police forces and entities in need of protection dogs have switched over to the Malinois because the GSD is so overbred. Unfortunately now we're seeing a lot of shit Malis in the field from bad breeding. My prediction is that the Dutch Shepherd is next. It's not quite as popular, but just as drivey as the Malinois, and once they start getting out, bring on the shit breeders...

The good thing is though, at least some good working GSDs are out there. Skippy, did your dad ever do Schutzhund or did he mostly just stick with security/K9 stuff (although they're similar in a few ways :shrug: )?

Support shelters, but also support breeders who do their job right by their dogs. It's not all about money, nor is it about ribbons and trophies. At this point, with so many dogs no longer doing the jobs for which they were bred (or no longer ABLE TO, rather), let's focus on health first, as well as keeping at least some of that genetic drive alive. Even the Golden has been dumbed down from a light, graceful retreiving animal to a heavy, stocky 100+ lb "bear" of a dog; this is more apparent in the Labrador lines, with the "field" Lab vs the "show" strain, or as most people recognize it, the "English" and "American" Labs.

Kennel clubs ruin dogs. Plain and simple.

[Lord Anubis]

I used a breeder for my latest chocolate lab. But I did my homework first. I would never use a backyard breeder for any reason.

[Ghost Wolf]

My family owns a Animal Boarding kennel. We see tons of animals that come in everyday, especially dogs.

I'm not going to diss dog breeders or anything but to be completely honest not many of them have any idea what they are doing.

My family has found that it's most of the time mixed breed dogs that are the best to get. Pure breds are more prone to disease and medical issues:
Schnauzers: Blind, deaf, bad skin, diabetes, cancer
Rottweilers: Liver and Kidney failure, Cancer
Labs & Goldens: CANCER!

It's because these dogs have been bred and rebred and rebred to "improve the look" that they've aquired hereditary diseases along the way. I'm sorry but I have to speak my mind about this.

--Ghost Wolf--

[LUCIDmoon]

You've shown pictures of prebreeds that don't look right. They look horrible, not like dogs at all. But have you shown any pictures of mutts? Beautiful mutts who DO look right? I suppose I'll be the first: I like to show off my babies and boast, ;D

Here's Harly and his daughter Chessa. My beautiful babies.

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/rpcharpics8/l_fca5273c0ad9ec0634b0eb72041dc6-1.jpg

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/rpcharpics8/108_1422-1.jpg

I prefer mutts much more to purebreds. They have a less likely chence of getting an inherited breed diseases.
Harly is some sort of odd golden retreiver, spaniel, chow, something else mix [from what we and his vet think]. Chessa's mother-- Harly's mate-- is, according to the people we got her from, half chihuahua and half rat terrier. I would post a pic of her, too, but since she got fixed she's gotten fat and she looks kinda funny, lol.
I love them sooo much. I'm sure, if they were purebred, I would love them just the same, but I would worry about them much more, too.

[Necro Mortis]

Personally when I get a dog I'll be getting a Pedigree. Yes, of course I’ll do my research but with mutts you don’t always know what breeds they come from. To have a happy and healthy dog you need to keep them physically fit, obviously, but to satisfy their mind and behaviour you need to understand what breeds they come from and how to fulfil each trait they may develop from said breed. If a part of a dog’s nature goes unfulfilled then they can develop behaviour problems and the like. A lot more mutts get euthanatized than pedigree dogs because they are more numerous and people that buy pedigree dogs tend to look after them and understand the dogs they are buying, unless they are complete and utter idiots, so is a controlled, documented history of their lineage such a bad idea?
I do understand that there is a problem with some breeds being inbred and basically run into the ground through these rigorous breeding standards that idiotic, cruel people that care less about the dog than their reputation in certain social/professional circles. I know breeds that get breathing difficulties, mental deficiencies and joint problems first hand and something does need to change but persecution of people that buy pure breeds is not the answer, although a lot of them need a damn good education before they’re allowed to buy any animal. It’s the breeders on the show circuit that need to be watched, what do they care about getting rid of a few puppies that are a drain on their resources in favour of the standard pleasing inbred, mental, sickly dogs they are breeding? It’s all about the money.

[NeonLightChild]

Actually, I've my eye on a purebred as well, Necro. I fully agree with you in that, while mutts make great pets and rescuing from the shelter (or a breed-specific rescue, if you can jump through their hoops) is a great way of getting a pet, there's nothing wrong with a purebred. I'd almost venture to guess that there is really more of a market for purebreds, along with mixed breeds of known ancestry (designer dogs).

Cathy from the Fugly Horse of the Day blog put it best when she was writing about people who breed hideous horses and then complain when their equally hideous foals aren't selling for untold thousands: "I’ve heard so much crap in the small animal world about how, if you breed, you’re taking a home away from a shelter pet. In most cases, nonsense. The person who is dead set on having a high quality Viszla, for example, is not going to truck down to the shelter and adopt a Chow-Shar Pei-Lab-Pit mix instead. The truth is, there’s always a market for a high quality, well bred, well conformed animal of any breed. The market that’s dead is the market for the Chow-Shar Pei-Lab-Pit puppies."

Am I something of a hypocrite? Maybe.

There are well-bred pedigreed dogs out there. The basic idea is to get one from a breeder who knows the ins and outs of the breed and does appropriate health testing to ensure that their puppies will be as healthy as possible. It's one thing for a breeder to stud out a champion fluffball just because he looks pretty and fits closest to how someone said that particular breed should look...it's another thing to stand a health- and temperament-tested dog at stud to approved bitches. In one case, you get a crapshoot in terms of genes, but an assurance that your pups might be "show quality;" in the other, you get a better chance that you will have a healthier dog that has the potential to end up spending you less at the vet's office Unfortunately, it still goes that, while a lot of purebreds are not sick dogs, there is a higher probability that they have or will have things go wrong with them (http://server.vet.cam.ac.uk/FMPro?-db=breeddb&-lay=alldata&-format=search.html&-view).

The best thing about it is that we have a choice in the matter. If you're a fan of smooshed faces, go right ahead and get an English Bulldog...you're going to be the one living with the farting and the snoring. I personally think that breed needs to die out, but it seems, with their current popularity and "cuteness" status, highly implausible of that ever happening. Are you in the market for a good pet? You have the choice between rescuing OR doing your homework and finding a responsible breeder, and the only one swaying that decision should be YOU--not the radical rescue folks who, for some reason, have a personal vendetta against any and all people who own dogs with working reproductive organs (with that, I'm sure we can all agree that not everyone who has these dogs should). What about those in need of a working dog? Better off to go to a breeder who actually has working dogs for the task you want and who knows how to select a good pup out of a litter.

(By the way, despite the predictability of basic temperament, characteristics, and aesthetics of purebreds, the sheer number of them in shelters and breed-specific rescues do show that there's no guarantee that what they are precludes better care. Anyone care to look around and find some concrete numbers on the amount of purebreds vs mutts?)

[Taralupe]

I have seen the video's on Crufts and a few about the AKC and what their standards are. I have long agreed with the regulation of dog shows based on looks but I think the likelihood of having better standards in dog shows is about the same as banning them all together. There are simply too many 'breeders' out there that either make a lot of money off breeding top dogs in the circuit or breed enthusiasts that refuse to alter the breed to make it more functional.
I personally think that dog shows should be banned and the breeds that can no longer breed naturally or give birth naturally should no longer be bred or be bred with similar breeds so that they can. I have 2 wonderful mongrels myself that I adore, rescue mutts will always be 100% better than any show mutt! :D

[MetaKittie]

Registration with a kennel club means NOTHING in terms of health, breeding potential, or possible show points. It's just proof that your dog is a purebred. Hell, the AKC itself even said that it would register a blind, deaf, three-legged purebred pup with green fur and hip dysplasia because "AKC, unfortunately, does not mean quality." No idea on where the Kennel Club stands on this, but judging from the case of George in the video, it's probably about the same. (By the way, if you want to see more of the hideous German Shepherds, here's more video (http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/1791/pedigree-dogs-exposed-filmmaker-releases-extended-footage-of-german-shepherds/) that wasn't put into the documentary!)

You may not need a video and neither do I (or probably a good number of people on this board), but there are those who are blind to everything but beauty and pedigrees and ribbons, not to mention the dogs themselves. (As an aside, it's said that a number of dog trainers leave the business not because of the dogs, but because of the sheer IDIOTS they have for owners...I imagine one day I'll go the same way after some time.)

I'm going into vet tech pretty soon myself, by the way...between that and training, I'll hopefully occupy myself in good ways.

Actually, AKC supports puppy mills in mass. And a puppy mill will breed ANYTHING. A lot of them lie on papers and you end up with a mutt, thinking it is purebred.

[NeonLightChild]

Actually, AKC supports puppy mills in mass. And a puppy mill will breed ANYTHING. A lot of them lie on papers and you end up with a mutt, thinking it is purebred.

Yet another reason the AKC does not receive my support. They've been in bed with the puppy mills for years and it's documented in their meeting notes that they have no intention of stopping this, merely because it nets them more money. I don't know if I posted this already, but the Sept 2008 (http://www.akc.org/about/chairmans_report/2008.cfm?page=9) Chairman's Report tells the whole tale. Their Nov 2008 (http://www.akc.org/about/chairmans_report/2008.cfm?page=11) report does a really god job of trying to suck up, but I don't think it passes muster.

Something else you might find interesting is that these kennels are NOT "puppy mills" by name. To give it a more positive spin and take out the battery cage imagery, the AKC calls them High Volume Breeders (http://www.caninechronicle.com/Features/Bernardi_08/bernardi_108.html). It's interesting to note that some people in breed clubs actually take issue with selling their pups in pet stores, and I suggest you take a look at this long, boring, stuffy document of the AKC Delegates' Quarterly Meeting from 2006 (http://www.akc.org/pdfs/about/delegates_meeting/sept06.pdf). Skip down to page 20, where Mrs Laurans takes the stand under "New Business" (it's in the middle column about halfway down the page). Her request for appropriate information on why pet stores are selling AKC pups against the breed clubs' wishes is first swept aside and ignored; when she insists on an answer, she is told to politely shut up and sit down because "We've been taking their money for 75 years and cashing their checks." It's a short little exchange, but, similar to the "AKC unfortunately does not mean quality" comment from the Parade article I mentioned earlier, it speaks nothing short of volumes about where the priorities lay for this sad, sad organization.

As for the lying about being purebred, it's a sad truth (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2009/03/akcs-long-love-affair-with-puppy-mills.html) in the puppy mill industry, though not so much with the backyard "hobby" breeders, or the true show breeders (the article is a LONG read, but very much worth the information). I find it interesting though, that this goes on despite the undeniable fact that kennel clubs' ideas ARE based on eugenics, with the purity of the breed being tantamount to everything. The Dalmatian Club of America has still not yet accepted LUA dogs because of that single outcross to the Pointer 14 generations ago; it ruined the purity of the Dalmatian breed. Even in 1905, people were noting that the Deerhound was becoming heavily inbred (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2009/11/from-bassetts-to-auschwitz-in-50-years.html) and suggested crossing it with a Borzoi, but the issue of purity again won out over sanity (although this article too is a long read, at least take a gander at the beginning!). And then the AKC has the nerve to fudge what comes from puppy mills is nothing short of hypocrisy. [Not that I am for 'purity' and whatnot, but this double-standard needs addressed and unfortunately, the way things are going, I will probably not be around when it is.]

I personally think that dog shows should be banned and the breeds that can no longer breed naturally or give birth naturally should no longer be bred or be bred with similar breeds so that they can.
While I like your passion, show bans and what you're describing as a modified breed ban are not the answer. Even though the reasoning is based on true science here rather than emotion and knee-jerk reaction to how a breed looks, any attempt to outlaw a breed or any activity related to a breed is going to be met with resistance beyond belief, no matter what breed/activity it is. Consider dogfighting: it is illegal, but still here and very much alive in all cultures worldwide. (As an aside, I highly recommend any dog enthusiast watch the documentary Off the Chain (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472478/). It is painful and hard to watch at times, but it is the real thing and gives a glimpse into the world of dogfighting.)

The answer to this dilemma is simply education to dog owners and unveiling the truth behind the ribbons and 'Best of Show' titles. Freedom of choice is paramount: from the freedom to own a breed that lives its entire life in pain to the freedom to buy a puppy from a respectable breeder instead of bowing to the pressure of the Radical Rescue-Only people. These are some good guidelines (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2009/10/so-you-want-dog.html) to think about when looking into getting a dog, no matter where you get it.

By the way, for anyone in the States with BBC America on your channel list, please mark your calenders: Pedigree Dogs Exposed, if you have not yet or are not able to watch it on the link in the first post of this thread, will be aired December 10th at 8PM (http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news.aspx?id=20091104bbca01).

[Jweller777]

The rare Norwegian Puffin dog is probably the hardest dog breed to buy. They have polydactile toes, ultra flexibility in shoulders so they can lay out like a dead bear rug, and can turn their heads around like an Owl, seriously. Amazing dogs bred for work.

[Topology]

Breeding for looks over health is stupid and unethical, but I don't see much wrong in breeding for a type of work, like with border collies. A working dog has to be healthy, so breeders are unlikely to sacrifice that for looks.

And not to disparage mutts, but there are some advantages to specialization - the average border collie is more likely to excel at sheep herding than the average mutt.
________
vapor genie (http://vaporizers.net/vapor-genie)

[NeonLightChild]

Topology, your post reminded me of a few good writings regarding the herding dogs.

Luisa waxes eloquent (http://lassiegethelp.blogspot.com/2007/12/on-titles-and-codes-of-ethics-or-how.html) about the irony of AKC "herding" trials versus the wide-open spaces of Zamora, among other things, while Donald McCaig documents the battle (http://www.amazon.com/Dog-Wars-Border-Battled-American/dp/0979469007) between the anti-AKC border collie clubs and the AKC that wanted to vacuum them up into the void that is pedigree dog breeding. Patrick Burns publicizes (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2009/12/don-mccaig-on-pedigrees-and-paranoia.html) some of Don's list-serv contents (and goes on a semi-random political tangent toward the end), and also goes on a little bit about the meat (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2007/10/akc-by-faith-alone.html) of Don's book.

He frequents several dog blogs I follow, and he's very much a man who knows his stuff, to say the least.

On another note from a few months ago, the AKC does allow mixed-breeds (http://cynography.blogspot.com/2010/01/now-we-see-violence-inherent-in-system.html) to be registered and compete with the blue-bloods with a few certain stipulations. I would post the original bulletin, but Heather's analysis is so spot-on that it's more worth the read.

[Topology]

Very interesting reading; I hadn't realized that collies and borders were so recently of the same ancestry.

Stipulating that mixed breeds have to be sterilized to be registered is frankly barbaric. I'd say more but I don't want to invoke Godwin in a thread about dogs :p
________
free vaporizer (http://howtomakeavaporizer.info)

[NeonLightChild]

Stipulating that mixed breeds have to be sterilized to be registered is frankly barbaric.
One might argue that the practice is also drastically decreasing the quality of life in dogs, pedigree or not. There are some potentially serious health ramifications (http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/longtermhealtheffectsofspayneuterindogs.pdf) to removing various parts of the body that produce hormones that are vital to development and bodily function.

I found another thread on the topic in which one member, all spelling/grammar mistakes aside, nailed the debate outright with this little gem:

Here's how it's [the spay/neuter argument] full of fail.

If you own a dog, you are to monitor it constantly. If you monitor the dog, there is NO WAY you will wind up with an unwanted litter.

ANY unwanted litter is YOUR fault. It's not the dog's fault, nor another dog owners fault, it's YOUR FAULT.

Now, as to the problem of pet over population being solved by de-sexing... has it worked yet? Care to postulate a reason why it hasn't worked yet?

"Well smartypants," you may say, "There are not enough people caring enough about thier animals to de-sex them."

Makes sense, doesn't it.

But wait... the people who ARE de-sexing thier animals care about thier animals and are also the people who are the most likely to monitor thier dogs. So they quite likely are de-sexing for no reason, and are potentially harming thier pet for NO REASON.

As to the people who are NOT de-sexing thier animals, they fall into 4 camps. 1:Those who don't care if the dog breeds, 2:byb'ers, 3:those who can't afford the proceedure, and 4:those who are professional handlers of some sort.

The pro's aren't about to have thier animals breed without careful selection and forethought and the byb'ers won't be stopped without legislation and enforcement.

So who are you really looking at as the source of the problem that you are going to cure with de-sexing?

Only one group can be targeted with de-sexing as a solution... and it's those who don't care.

Now, those who don't care, DON'T CARE... and we move massive amounts of propaganda and false unformation towards making people think that de-sexing is the only possible moral solution to the problem of over-population in an effort to make peer pressure work upon these people who don't care ... but it only works on the people who CARE. And the people who CARE are monitoring thier animals ANYWAY. The people who don't care? ... THEY DON'T CARE. They will NEVER care, and potentially harming your animal in an effort to MAKE them care is made of fail.

I suggest reading the entire thread (http://pets-n-people.net/vb/showthread.php?t=10699) to hear all the arguments for and against the practice.

However, I digress back to the topic at hand...

I'd say more but I don't want to invoke Godwin in a thread about dogs :p
When discussing anything relating back to eugenics, I don't think there's a neccesary need to even say the man's name. He was indeed the champion of the movement in the most drastic way possible in human history. Rather than invoking Godwin, might I suggest invoking Darwin? Of course, any kennel club is against the vital "Survival of the fittest" paradigm: a ridge-less Rhodesian ridgeback, which is an affront to the breed society (remember, "If it hasn't a ridge, it isn't a ridgeback") is more likely to survive than the best show-bred English bulldog, who can neither mate nor give birth without human intervention. And funny how Basenjis here in the States have such a choked gene pool, but not over in Africa where they actually still perform a job (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2010/04/basenjis-diamonds-and-magic-meat.html) and *GASP* are not only NOT pedigreed, but probably come from such a mixed background that calling them a "type" would be more accurate!

And don't get me started on the fLabs that inhabit the show ring (http://retrieverman.wordpress.com/2009/11/01/an-overdone-labrador/) now. I'll buy you a new watch if any of these can even follow directions to a duck in a blind retrieve (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwQukJRDFSc), much less do it for any extended length of time. (Sadly, the trees obscure the dog's response in that video. They basically stop on a dime upon the whistle and await directional instruction to where the decoy is...hence the name "blind" retrieve: the dog has no way of knowing where the bird has fallen, and must trust his handler to direct him there. On another note, observe how SVELTE those Labbies are!)

I could go on with same about the golden retriever. This is not supposed to be a 100-lb bear (http://retrieverman.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/golden-retrievers-are-dogs-not-bears/): too much "bone" and the dog becomes unfit for the daily rigors of hunting. Too much fur sponges up and holds too much water weight. Sad thing that this awesome boy (http://www.ambertrail.com/pushstuddog.html) doesn't get too much time in the show ring...my heavens, a golden retriever who can actually do its job and look great too! He'd blow the show breeders out of the ring if they didn't laugh him out first for not being a "proper" golden. See, he doesn't even WEIGH enough, and where's all that feathering?

No, those were not shameless plugs for the Retrieverman blog...he just happened to have appropriate blogs on the topics I needed at the time.

I'm not debating the fact that these dogs are pedigreed purebreds whose diseases might be slightly more predictable than the average mutt...but let's pretend, if just for a small while, that they can conform to the Kennel Club's pie-in-the-sky slogan that they've been parading with trumpets and voices on high since the airing of PDE back in 2008: "Fit for function, fit for life."

The dogs of ancient Egypt, Africa, the lure coursers from the Middle East, the herders from yon fells and even the terriers of old survived before kennel clubs became a little green twinkle (suspiciously resembling a money sign) in some person's eyes. Sadly, the Middle Eastern deserts are devoid of champion hair-dressers' dreams (http://www.afghanhoundworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/winner_eurodog_2008.jpg) and the sheep pens are empty of a dog who is claimed by NAME (http://www.klgsd.com/American%20Showline.jpg), even, to be able to herd them! What a shame that people worldwide do not agree that the "quality" that comes from the show ring should not hold up in the real world :cry:

[Lupa]

Mutt or Purebred, I love them all - a dog is a dog no matter what.
I have my eye on a purebred GSD in the future personally. Why? Because I want a future champion.
I'm looking into dog training, handling, and possibly breeding.

Also, you have to take into consideration of something - most breeds today were mutts at one point in time or another. Some have gone extinct because people stopped breeding them as they no longer served a function or purpose.
Thus a breed that steamed from the extinct breed became the new popular breed and was no longer a mutt - it was a purebred.

So it's a cycle. Assuming people stopped breeding purebreds then new breeds would arise and then in order to get more dogs like that, people will eventually start breeding mutts with other mutts of there kind - thus resulting in a purebred. Eventually at least.

If I can give the dog proper treatment then I see no reason why I shouldn't get a purebred in the future.

I've seen many and met many dogs who love to be in the ring, they love the attention, are faithful companions and love to win. How do I know this you may be wondering... I can see it in their eyes. They know they are in the spotlight and love it.

I love dogs, possibly more than myself (and I'm a narcissist so that's saying a lot) - mutt or pedigree, a dog is a dog and all a dog really want is to make you happy and to be happy themselves.
So if that can happen, then I see no difference for mutt or pedigree other than for personal preference.

Also, I should add a lot of brachycephalic dogs were bred that way for a reason, once upon a time - at least for the larger breeds - they were bred for fighting and their face wrinkles were for protection. However they later served other purposes and their aggression died down. Now they are companion or working dogs.
And for others, it wasn't bred in - it could have been a mutation for all we know.

So, anyway, mutt or pedigree - I'll love the dog either way. It all comes down to what I'm looking for.

Also, I haven't seen any sufficient evidence against the AKC to believe anything you wrote either. Not saying you're lying, I'm just a major skeptic.

[NeonLightChild]

I'll be splitting my reply into 2 posts, since I actually went over the limit with this one!

I have my eye on a purebred GSD in the future personally. Why? Because I want a future champion.
I'm looking into dog training, handling, and possibly breeding.
If you can get into the show ring with a dog who scores OFA Good or Excellent on hips, Normal elbows, has temperament and working titles on it (not just the obligatory ScHI that most show breeders go for, I want to see at least up to ScHIII with some possible other titles on it too, whether obedience, tracking or even Ringsport), then best of luck to you, and I hope your dogs win over the Ambred slinkies and Euro banana-backs (http://www.asuperiorgsd.com/p2p.html). It will be a great day when a squared-up GSD (http://leerburg.com/gsd-gate.htm) with actual long bones (http://www.thedogplace.org/Breeder/Genetics/Emperors-New-Clothes_Klumb.asp) places in show history, and while I will be nowhere near the show ring (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_z3fgk9bQw) for good reason (by that point in time, I will hopefully be on the field working police K9s whose toes do NOT drag on the ground and whose hips and hocks don't look like they need a support system to keep from buckling), I expect some sort of notification of your successes :rockon:

If I can give the dog proper treatment then I see no reason why I shouldn't get a purebred in the future.
Did you read any of what I wrote at all? It is my perogative that everyone be given freedom of choice to own the dog of his/her choice. I support owning purebreds from breeders and support adopting mutts from county-run kill shelters. What the concern is about here, is that people need to be aware of WHY their dogs are the way the are: WHY are Rottweilers and retrievers walking cancer bombs, WHY only the "best" Chihuahuas must have a gaping hole (http://www.skullsunlimited.com/record_variant.php?id=5229) in their head, WHY bulldogs/pugs/Pekes/etc cannot breathe properly...and once people know WHY, the general consensus should not be to get RID of the breed (although I feel strongly of this in the case of the bulldog), but to FIX it so that it no longer has these problems. Unfortunately, people love their defective dogs the way they are right now, and that love makes everyone loathe to take appropriate action.

Also, I should add a lot of brachycephalic dogs were bred that way for a reason, once upon a time - at least for the larger breeds - they were bred for fighting and their face wrinkles were for protection. However they later served other purposes and their aggression died down. Now they are companion or working dogs.
And for others, it wasn't bred in - it could have been a mutation for all we know.
I will not attack you personally, and I apologize if this paragraph is seen as such. But you obviously do not know your canine history. Bulldogs are a relatively new breed, dating back to the late 19th century. Tell me, can you see a lumbering 70-lb dwarf who can't breathe in high temperatures doing a butcher dog's work? It can't. Take a gander at this post (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2009/03/bulldogs-how-did-we-come-to-select-for.html) for a little bit more in-depth research as to see what exactly is the history of the dog to which you are probably referring. Other breeds, such as the pug, Pekingese and Boston Terrier, have had flat faces bred into them because it looked "cute." Tell me you have seen the swooning throngs of teenage girls around any type of Peke-mix puppy and squealing about how "cute" it is...I have, many mane times, and it's not just the Pekes. Tell me you have seen the prepubescent boys gathered around bulldogs, trying to make them "play rough and be tough", while the dogs just lay down after a while because they need to replenish their oxygen supplies. Oh sure, bulldog breeders try to justify their qualities by saying that "The dog needs his flat face so that it can breathe while latched onto a bull," or "The wrinkles pull blood away from the dog's eyes." A flat face isn't desirable in any working dog. I have not yet met one dog in any Schutzhund trial or seminar who hasn't had a full muzzle with a solid bite that enables it to be thrown through the air on a courage test (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUdb07hK21w) (I'm the awkward person in the back holding a camera at 17 seconds, and those who've read my car "For Sale" ad will probably be able to pick it out of all the DogMobiles :p ). Even a humble Jack Russell Terrier, with it's smaller skull, requires a mesocephalic muzzle in order to catch and hold, whether it's a sleeve (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTN5kTkdvME) or a groundhog (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GoArDtvkbo) (she grabs on pretty well at 38 seconds). Come to think of it, can a bulldog grab and hold anything with it's f'd up jaw (http://www.boneclones.com/BC-128.htm)? Apparently one dog food company thinks that brachycephalic breeds need their own special shape (http://products.royalcanin.us/products/dog-food/bulldog-24.aspx?mbPage=/products.aspx) of kibble, just to make it easier for the poor misshapen darlings to eat (the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSM0gzm7xec) is indeed something else!). I can't see it holding on to something so boringly straight as a bull's leg comfortably for any period of time. And that little flat face comes with a maze of nasal passages (think a normal dog who's just been smashed in the face with a Mack truck...where else is there to go for all that soft tissue?), but also an elongated soft palate, which can go past the trachea and contribute to breathing problems as well as the characteristic snorting and snoring. Real "cute," eh? How about "useful"? Nah. Here's a good example (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joQd3j6Y4uY) of what a bulldog might have to do in terms of biting and retaining a moving target (no sound, not my video). The REAL bulldog doing the job is fit, well-trained and athletic enough to do everything asked of him in this trial--the obedience and agility exercises are first, the actual bitework starts at about 1:25. I have yet to hear of any contrived, bred-down brachycephalic wrinkly dwarf attempting these tests.

Oh, and if you want to discuss the bulldog some more, perhaps you would like to meet David Hancock an actual canine historian (that is, if you think the Terrierman's post is full of bunk) who is also featured in PDE, although he goes into more detail on the bulldog in a recent Nature documentary. It's called "Dogs That Changed the World (http://www.amazon.com/Nature-Dogs-That-Changed-World/dp/B000PMGKXY)," and I highly recommend watching the entire program (consisting of 2 documentaries) just for the information within, which is not at all limited to just the problems found within pedigree breeding. You'll find Dr Hancock towards the end of the second part, and his words and comparison of historical pictures of what the bulldog USED to be are quite striking.

So, anyway, mutt or pedigree - I'll love the dog either way. It all comes down to what I'm looking for.
I completely agree, and I would expect no less out of anyone who chose to welcome any 4-legger into their household as either a companion or a service/working animal.

[NeonLightChild]

Also, I haven't seen any sufficient evidence against the AKC to believe anything you wrote either. Not saying you're lying, I'm just a major skeptic.
I appreciate your words, but as they stand now, it is your opinion. Peppered throughout this entire thread, I have presented members here with facts and documents drawn straight from the AKC website, videos about canine health, as well as research from Patrick Burns (the Terrierman whose post I linked to above), who somehow makes time in his life to work for Taxpayers Against Fraud, write a book on working terriers, dig on his own dogs in the fields, write a regular column for Dogs Today, do his homework about dog breeds and their respective histories, write extremely articulate and well-researched posts about dogs and dog politics (you might be interested in his recent one in which he rips a new one in a Pfizer Animal Health sales rep...it's an absolute CLASSIC), and STILL have time to be a family man. You have presented me...nothing but words. Go ahead and be a skeptic, but any proof of the connection between kennel clubs and ruined breeds or the AKC/puppy mill connection is out there for the taking, should you find it in yourself to take a look. If you do, I suggest you start with this recent post (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2010/06/before-chris-hansen-was-catching.html), and focus on the video clip included. And while ]this post (http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2010/06/fgomr.html) isn't so much AKC as it is puppy mills and the AMVA, the connection is clear: the pet industry, to those who investigate who's who and what they're up to, is based on nothing but separating owners from their wallets and basically screwing them up one tree and down another.

By the way, that 45-minute Dateline investigation runs circles around the Oprah puppy mill thing. Watch the Dateline show if you want to see some good reporting on the issue, aside from the small PeTArd plug. Watch the Oprah show only if you're seeking some sniffles and feely-good shit.

I know there's literature out there about how the AKC has done nothing but good for dogs, how their Canine Health Foundation is doing all it can do document diseases, learn about them and eradicate them, and how their USDA-licensed "high-volume breeders" are caring people who are only providing a service for puppy buyers. Funny, the USDA's own report (http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/33002-4-SF.pdf) (rather large PDF file, not for dial-up) on it's puppy-mill inspection results and practices cites a rather disconcerting trend that *gasp* repeated breeder violations do exist, and in rather large numbers too. Tell me, how does someone who keeps a dog for 7 days in the conditions on page 15 not get arrested for felony animal cruelty on the spot, while a dairy farmer in Plain City, OH is now under the microscope for the truly sadistic, inhuman (not to mention inhumane) practices toward his animals done by his employees? [That is a whole different thread topic if anyone would like to discuss it, I'm just using it as a comparison to the topic at hand. Also, don't forget, should you ever be able watch that video, that all it takes is a label to make someone into who someone else wants you to think they are!] The dog was required to be, and was humanely euthanized, and a year later, the breeder still hadn't paid his fine. Oh fiddle-sticks, some money for a dead dog, yes dead...but who suffered in ways that most of us living in houses with internet connections would never imagine.

As for the health, one might assume that we've known for a LONG TIME about such a thing called a "coefficient of inbreeding (http://www.terrierman.com/inbredthinking.htm)." It doesn't take a geneticist to see who's in who's pedigree...just take a look at the fancy paper with long names on it. If any name appears more than once, that is a problem which drives up your CoI; unfortunately, this is all too common in many (all? NO! most? MAYBE! none? WHO'RE YOU KIDDING?!) dogs. And of course a higher CoI number is not good. It's unrealistic to expect any animal to NOT be inbred, but to see inbreeding done to the point it is today has been shown, through both scientific research as well as simple observation and diagnostic testing, to be nothing but disastrous for the dog, despite the bleats from breeders who tut-tut that "No one knows about genetics and breeding better than us, and look at this champion that came from a brother-sister mating!" Remember the Scottish terrier that won Westminster? Her pedigree has unfortunately become unavailable, but suffice it to say that I counted at least 3 names that appeared multiple times, on both the sire's and dam's side! (If anyone has the resources or knowledge to look up the pedigree of "CH. Roundtown Mercedes of Maryscot", I'd appreciate it...I'd like to post it back up here as a prime example of inbreeding.) I won't comment about the poodle circles...this article (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/11/sports/othersports/11frozen.html?_r=2&ref=science) is eyebrow-raising in and of itself! The CoI numbers themselves are even more staggering. Don't forget the standard that was once the Royal Crown and many other rulers: if you can't marry a relative, then your blood will no longer be "pure" and the throne will be compromised. Well, thankfully it's no longer that was for the vast majority of the world today (although one does question where those giant Dumbo ears come from in today's Royal Family!).

There's a really long, but well-written article from Don McCaig that goes into detail about how inbreeding, especially in dogs, is simply screwing yourself (http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2010/10/inbreeding-screwing-yourself.html). McCaig, if I've mentioned him before, is the man who documented the fight (http://www.amazon.com/Dog-Wars-Border-Battled-American/dp/0979469007) between the AKC and the border collie enthusiasts to prevent the breed from being swallowed up into "the fancy" and turned into, what is unfortunately now known as (since the AKC was successful in it's NOMmination of the breed) the "Barbie collie."

This is the kind of business the AKC must rely on in order to keep their funds going, since registration numbers are otherwise significantly down. I'll link to Heather again (http://cynography.blogspot.com/2010/03/emperors-striptease.html), since she has time, experience and resources that I do not, to show'n'tell what exactly is happening with the AKC's business model and why it is failing. (By the way, Heather is a trainer specializing in SAR, as well as a rescuer who also breeds, on the rare basis, a breed that is thankfully not recognized by the AKC. I suggest you check out the link I posted on 4/20/10 in that last paragraph so that you can get a clearer picture of her feelings for the AKC. Her blog posts on SAR topics are also classics.)

Are there breeders out there who do it right? Yes, and I've met some of them, most of whom do working dogs, and a very few who register with the AKC or the UKC. To whom they give their money is none of my business, but if I were to invest in any of their dogs, it would behoove me to know that their breeding practices are nothing short of the best (and the dog I receive would not be registered, as no registry would ever get any of my money unless it is for performance work ONLY). They do a great job at what they do, and the one show breeders (http://www.redyre.com/)' dogs and offspring continue to do well in the show ring. It's unfortunate that they get painted along with the little-kid "let's make as much mess as possible with as little effort" in my diatribes, and were I able to single them out and let them do their job, I'd not hesitate. Unfortunately, the words and actions of the AKC as well as the Kennel Club of Britain (despite their efforts to clean up their act) speak as loud as the breed clubs that make them up, and it's there that we will continue to see the demise of good dogs, if not outwardly, then on the inside and in places where only geneticists and scientists really have their say.

[PsychoWolfy92]

I agree that mutts are the best way to go. Some mutts are so cute and beautiful, but are overlooked because they're not a "real" breed. It really does anger me.[/QUOTE]
Aggree mutts are cute :D i saw a cute little mutt at a pet store it looked like a mini German Shepperd it was so cute with its blue eyes :D

[NeonLightChild]

For those who are interested, the producer of the documentary Pedigree Dogs Exposed has a blog of the same name (http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.com/).

She goes into a lot of detail on her fight with the British Kennel Club, as well as detailing and documenting the plight of many breeds that didn't get much of a spotlight in the film. She's gotten quite a lot of entries written already, but please do give it a look-over if you're at all interested in the welfare of purebred dogs.

[GhostBat]

What do people here think of welsh corgis? It's a while off before we get a dog, but Chris has fallen in love with them. It's the medium-sized dog with little legs thing that's won him over. Do they tend to have health issues? Are there any good corgi mixes?

[NeonLightChild]

I don't know of any specific health problems relating to the breed, but do know that, because of their design, you just need to be careful of their back...watch their weight, don't let them jump down from high places, etc etc.

I did find this (http://breedriskprevention.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/Dr_Corgi_disease_listing_by_breed_section_5_pdf.35 83226.pdf), though, which is a life of potential things that can go wrong. You'll find lists like this with a lot of purebreds, so don't panic!

I can get you in touch with a Corgi breeder if you're interested, even if you don't want a puppy right now (although she might have some left over from her September litter, I don't know :D). She might have some more experience behind her to answer any specific questions you might have.

As for mixes, the only ones I can remember (that I remember liking, that is) are the corgi-Jack Russell (http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/c/cojack.htm) and the Corgi-Australian Shepherd (http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/a/aussiecorgi.htm). Both were extremely active dogs, the corgi-Jack all the more so. I'm sure more mixes are out there, but those are the two I've actually been able to see in person and interact with.

[Cahalith]

When I was a little girl all I wanted was a dog, when I was 8 my mom finally said yes. I was so excited, i was expecting to go to a shelter or a place that had lots of dogs, for me to hold and play with before choosing.

I was seriously let down.

As we drove into suburbia and pulled into a driveway and got out of the car we where greeted by a woman who breed stranded poodles. I almost started to cry. My mom then told me out of the two puppies that where their I could have the female because they didn't spray. I told her, I would rather not have a dog then have a poodle.

Though we ended up leaving with 'my' dog who was later named Cinder- She was a good dog, very sweet and calm. She didn't want to play, she didn't want to eat anything but a particular brand of dog food (science diet) She never barked, never bit any one...But was always sick.

She only growled once at a puppy that was in her space. She was my mom's perfect dog. good to be around children, but she was always sick and had low energy. didn't even like going for walks, though very well behaved.

I will NEVER get a poodle and this is why: Her father was her grandfather, some friend bought the next litter from this breeder which where Cinders' Brother's and mother's puppies, the next litter they got was Cinders Grandfather and a female from the litter the friends didn't pick up.

It was really kinda disturbing. The amount of inbreeding is just wrong. they don't let people inbreed so why should we encourage inbreeding in pets?

[NeonLightChild]

WHERE'S THE LUV? :-{(
Dos shows these days............ i'll just leave it at that.....

Dude, you just lowered the entire IQ of this thread with that remark.

I was damn proud of how intelligent this thread was.

Your comment made you appear about as stupid as the Barbie collies who can't herd a sheep if it ran along in front of them.

Or the highly-bred, show-winning Irish setter that couldn't point a bird if it was placed in front of them.

Go away from my thread until you chlorinate your gene pool and can form an actual opinion about the matter at hand.