Are ethical breeders breeding enough to support the gene pool?

Question

It's becoming more difficult to find good quality dogs. Many of the gene pools seem to be getting smaller which increases the chance for more health issues to crop up. So should ethical breeders be encouraged to breed more?

Answer 1

Short answer: Unless you advocate cloning, your hypothesis in my view not logical or attainable.



Long answer: This notion that we can just breed more "good stuff" and get rid of the bad is idealistic.



Putting money and all else aside, it assumes you can cookie cutter dog production. A breeder of Dobermans back in the 1970's (actually she started before that but I was too young to remember) - anyway, she was THE Doberman breeder in Canada. Her dogs were virtually in every pedigree - and for the most part, they were outstanding.



Her Kennel - Schaufeline (spelling ) was the foundation of almost every breeder - certainly in Ontario and much further.



Her "formula" for breeding began to deterioate in the 1990's - and health problem rumours began. The last Doberman I saw of hers was a tiny, greyhound waife of a dog - fugly - and while I am sure her age and other reasons had a bearing, her kennel faded.



Its a story that has been repeated in GSD - and likely every "popular" breed on the planet. Once a dog becomes marketable - the gene pool is flooded with it, and line breeding becomes in-breeding. Breeders will justify anything to have that dog.



Nature is not a fan of capitalism nor does nature understand "good or bad genes". ( what scientifically is a "bad" gene?)



So....why are the gene pools getting smaller? Because the MOMENT a dog becomes a champion, or world champion - everyone and his uncle wants to breed to it for money.



The GSD has been well documented - Seiger lines have carried spondylosis from the 1960's to present day - its entirely and completely the fault of "ethical" breeders who want to breed "good genes".



And yeah, the fact we euthanize millions of dogs a year won't change either - because if and when we have better dogs - the price of those dogs will go UP - and breeders will make it virtually impossible to own them unless you (a) show them and/or (b) breed the living crap out of them on co-ownerships. To keep prices high - and minimize competition - breeders will continue to enforce spay neuter - and restrict breeding's to all but THEIR sire.



Circular logic takes us right back to the start - we have a few breeders with exceptional sires and dams who control the population of that breed.



The lowly family who wants a companion or pet will still go to the "B" list breeder, or the pound, or (gawd forbid) the pet store.



I recently saw an Ontario Doberman litter listed on kijiji of all places and they wanted $30,000 for a pup outright - I think it was $10,000 to have one on a contract. The guy CLAIMS to have imported an outstanding sire from Euro or Russia - anyway, he obviously wasn't bringing the dog over to increase the gene pool. You want one of those super dogs - you mortgage your house, or agree to a breeder having despotic control over you and your dog for life .



The world is not ready for "ethical" breeding.

Answer 2

Ethical breeders should breed more - the market should be mini-flooded with good dogs so that people can start to know what they look like and that they are worth it. The issue is doing this while still placing pups in appropriate homes and still maintaining actually working type when 99% of dogs are "just pets" in most breeds.



I agree that good dogs are hard to find, I adamantly DISagree with the idea that "small gene pools" are to blame or that a small gene pool means health problems - that is ONLY true if those problems are already in the pool. Ideally, I would want to see very, very small gene pools for actual genes present and for all of those genes to be ones that express good traits for the breed and meld correctly with all other genetics in the pool. From there you can build up a population, but making the pool bigger does you no good at all unless you are out-crossing ONLY to dogs without health problems where all genetics properly combine with the desirable elements already there (if that's the case, just use that great line altogether). If you had two dogs that carried no genetic health conditions, they and their offspring could be bred together continually without any genetic health problems occurring. Since these two dogs do not exist, the best practice would probably be to have as many smaller, sustainable, tightly line-bred lines within each breed as possible. Line-breeding will show you the genetics that are there, and then you know which lines to go to for your occasional out-cross if/when a problem pops up in your own line. Outcrossing everything within a breed just means a lot of heterogeneous genomes running around and no clue what will pop out of the whelping box.



So... ethical breeders should breed as many pups as they can find great homes for. I know too many people who would be great owners but can't/won't wait for a year or two on a waiting list - I wonder how many dozens or hundreds end up at a pet store after too many months of fruitless searching? A breeder should not lower their standards for a home, but as someone right now who waited 6 months for a litter that didn't have the pup I needed and now looking at a 2 year wait for the next potential litter (from ANY breeder of the THREE breeds I am looking into) I would say that there is often a problem of higher demand than supply for the well-bred pup.

Answer 3

In my breed where I live (in Canada), there`s been a good many of the ethical breeders, those who show, do various performance activities, and do all the health testing, have been importing dogs from all over the world in the last few years. Those countries include Germany, Belgium, Denmark, France - so I have to say they`re making sure the gene pool`s not getting smaller. We`re seeing dogs of outstanding quality coming up, but these breeders aren`t large scale breeders. They breed according to their plans, and only as many puppies as they feel they can correctly raise and socialize. No, I don`t think they should breed more as its always a disaster when any breed gets too popular too fast.

Answer 4

Well in my breed, the APBT it's getting harder and harder to find quality to standard stable dogs thanks to overbreeding and mixing by BYBs. The gene pool just isn't that big, but I do my best to breed the Best quality dogs. My b*tch is titled, does agility and a little weight pulling, and she has all genetic health testing covered. I find only the best sires and I only have one to two litters a year, 2 when I had more dogs, now I just have my one female and we've had a bit of a break and I'll be breeding her just once more next year before retiring her and retiring myself. But I am mentoring a couple of future breeders helping them in the show ring and preparing them to keep the APBT alive the way it should be. Breeders should focus on breeding the best they can, the Right way, and finding those pups the right homes. Yes, a bigger gene pool would be nice, I know a GSD breeder who exports/imports dogs, but with my breed it's difficult.

Answer 5

They would if they didn't have to worry about overpopulation from backyard breeders. I know several people in my breed who would be excellent, knowledgeable breeders who don't allow their dogs to have litters (even though they have excellent OFA scores and CH titles front and back) because there are too many of our dogs in rescue. I have only had a couple of litters out of my dogs (just had my first one in four years) because there aren't buyers near me willing to pay what good breeders charge, so they are getting their pups from one of two local backyard breeders whose dogs are terrible examples of the breed (looks and temperaments) and whose parents have zero health screenings and paying a couple hundred bucks up front and never ending vet bills after.

Answer 6

I think breeders are capable of making that decision for themselves. If there is a demand, then they should fill it.



Most people these days don't need a working dog, just a companion, and pretty much any dog can fill that position.