Another answer got me to thinking - how do you feel about LUA dals or ANY breed outcrosses for that matter?

Question

I don't mean this as an attack or an assualt against ANY user on here, the answerer in question should know I love her and 99.9% of her answers, haha.

Anyways, in regards to the KC, one user pointed out that the registration and showing of Fiona was one of their downfalls. That what Fiona brought to the breed should of been done by using "true" purebreds.

If you do not know, Fiona is a LUA Dalmation brought to the UK from Nevada and shown all the way to crufts. What's so special about Fiona? In the 1970s a dalmation was crossed with a champion pointer to produce a gene that blocked high uric acid, a gene that is prominent and deadly amongst dalmations. I almost want to say EVERY dalmation carries the gene for high uric acid, but I could be wrong on that. If every member of a breed carries the recessive gene, then what better way to fix it then outcross and bring in genes that could effectively BLOCK the recessive high uric acid gene? That's what the supporters of LUA dals stand by.

Fiona is the result of 14 generations of breeding LUA (Low Uric Acid) dalmations to top champions. The AKC has yet to allow registration, but the UKC and the KC has. Fiona was shown in crufts, and there was an OUTRAGE amongst breeders, calling her a mongrel and a disgrace to the breed, an insult to them and all they stand to achieve.

Again, I am trying to not make this too biased, lol. What is your opinion on this outcrossing? Or ANY breed outcrossing to try to improve health? I couldn't remember it, so I looked into it more, but were saint bernards not crossed with newfoundlands in the 1800s to improve breed health and dwindling numbers? And did this outcrossing not result in the long haired dogs we know today?

Remember, it has been 14 generations since the ONE outcrossed breeding, and since then LUA dals have pretty impressive pedigress, bred to many top champions.
http://www.luadalmatians.com/pedigrees.html

http://www.luadalmatians.com/index.html


And the dog in question, Fiona
http://dogsintraining.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/fiona-lua-dal.jpg?w=320&h=239

Answer 1

A mutt is a mutt is a mutt, even if its 98% pure.



It is one thing when a stud book is open, it is an entirely different thing when a stud book is closed.



The LUA Dalmations are not real Dalmations.



I had a Half Arabian Gelding who was 93% purebred (15/16ths Arabian), that still made him a Registered Half Arabian. Once you upset the gene pool with an outcrossed breed there is no going back to purity, no matter how much you wish it to be.



Health improvements need to be made within the breed.



I would have no interest in an "alleged" purebred of any breed if it was indeed mixed. That makes no sense.



Now if the Dalmation club wants to open up their stud books that is for their membership to decide.



Personally if I had the breed I would say no way.



Remember the fellow who started with Labradooles had good intentions and look what that has turned into.



Work with breed issues within the genetics of the breed.



***ADD*** Here is a great article and near the bottom has great links from Dalmation people as to why the LUA shold not be accepted.



http://www.showdays.info/LUA.php





ADD2- As I suspected, the "science" the LUA folks have used is not reliable research from what I am reading.



http://www.showdays.info/logo/Facey+article-1.pdf



Seems to me like folk proclaiming all Labradoodles are "hypoallergenic", I guess if you say it enough many will believe it.



ADD3- THANKS for an interesting subject. When I get back from work I will look into it more!!!!!!

Answer 2

That would be taking outcrossing to the extreme, as I define it as injecting fresh new material from within the breed using different lines to promote mental & physical soundness, as opposed to going back to basics & creating a mixed ancestry dog, then have to regain breed type by selecting dogs that concentrate good qualities of the breed, & does not concentrate hereditary weaknesses.



I am aware that another contributor cited the Malinois as an example a working breed that is commonly crossed to make a dog that is a better working animal to do the type of work required of it because of the sum of its mixed ancestry parts. It serves a functional purpose, so justified, but they are not purebred in the purest sense of the word because of the dilution.



As the Dobermann is so far down the working dog toilet it is now all but a working breed in name only, it has occurred to me that one way to claw back its reputation as a working breed would be to inject fresh genetic material by crossing it with a proven working Malinois.



The breeder would then to have regain consistency in type by breeding dogs tightly to the Dobermann standard, culling/refining until they has a dog with the appearance of the Dobermann & energetic, driven, intensely focused fireball quality of a working line Malinois tempered with the off switch off the Dobermann!



What I question is how many generations would have to breed true in terms of appearance, characteristics, temperament & abilities for the dog to be considered a purebred, not a mixed ancestry dog with the appearance of the breed which in my opinion is the case with Fiona.



Edit: Agree with Uhave2be, it is a very interesting question.

Answer 3

Isn't the prominent function of ALL breeds to work? And how do they expect a dog to work if it is unhealthy/dead?



I don't know beans about Dalmatian genetics, but I'll say this: I have NO problem with responsible crossing if done for a health/working purpose -- in other words, a legitimate purpose.



This is hardly crossing breeds to make money or for looks, this is to preserve the integrity of the breed, is it not?