Welcome to PetForums

Join thousands of other pet owners and pet lovers on the UK's most popular and friendly pet community and discussion forum.

Sign Up

Changing breed standards to include anomolies

Discussion in 'Dog Chat' started by Starlite, Oct 26, 2012.


  1. Starlite

    Starlite PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    7,369
    Likes Received:
    229
    or faults if you will.
    Ive had a very heated discussion with e few other Malamute owners who have completely written off showdogs and showing. Their reason is they have longcoats or blue eyed or giant "Malamutes" and feel if the breed standard cannot be amended to include these new "Evolutionary traits" the breed will die a death as it eill bottleneck and turn inbred :huh:

    What do you think of ammending breed standards to include issues like this which crop up in a breed?
     
  2. emmaviolet

    emmaviolet PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2011
    Messages:
    8,282
    Likes Received:
    2,171
    Its funny as the rough collie standard has a tipped ear never prick.

    As you say evolution took over and mostly every tipped ear has been weighted, especially at teething. However the expression is better with it.

    I think that a standard is a guide for breeders and very few of a breed fit it without exception.
     
  3. rona

    rona Still missing my boys

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2011
    Messages:
    39,236
    Likes Received:
    24,725
    Trouble is, that's what happened to include all those bad traits that crept into some breeds.
    I think it should be set and not changed. Just because people want something different, doesn't mean it's good for the long term health of the breed.
    If a dog breed is right and how it was intended to be, why change it.

    I'm sure the Goldie standard changed sometime in the last few decades to include white Goldies. It shouldn't be allowed. They are called GOLDEN retrievers
     
  4. Netpon

    Netpon PetForums Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    3
    Not adding these faults to the breed standard doesn't necessarily create a bottleneck. If the heritage of these dogs is researched carefully enough then it is possible to breed a dog with a fault to a dog with no genetic link to that fault to expand the lines and produce at least some pups with the fault. After that, with selective breeding, over time the fault will fade.

    I know there is a long coat genetic test for rotties
     
  5. Thorne

    Thorne PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,914
    Likes Received:
    57
    It's a tricky one! The "giant" Malamutes alarm me a bit - sound like the opposite of teacup Yorkies which are just a big marketing ploy.

    What I don't understand is why some colours are permitted in certain breeds in some countries but not others. Mantle Great Danes have only just been included in the KC standard but have been included for years with other registries. And black or black and tan Bulldogs; acceptable with the AKC but a massive no-no for KC reg. dogs. Unless there are health issues with the colour and if it's always been in the breed why not include it?
    That's a whole different kettle of fish to people outcrossing purely for colour so they can be sold as "rare" (Merle Chihuahuas spring to mind, from what I've heard they're a "new" colour).
    I agree wholeheartedly about Goldies; most of the show winners are blinding white in the UK and deep red in the USA! Ought to be called White Retrievers here and Red Retrievers there :rolleyes:

    I can see both sides: on the one hand if the standards are broadened then how on earth can a type be maintained?
    On the other hand, if dogs of unregisterable colour (for example) aren't included then it's not exactly helping the gene pool of show dogs. Hard to know where to draw the line.
     
  6. Firedog

    Firedog PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,781
    Likes Received:
    2,039
    Merle Chihuahuas cannot be registered under the KC anymore.
     
  7. Thorne

    Thorne PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,914
    Likes Received:
    57
    That's refreshing, just had a quick google and found the KC's statement that they can't be registered, not that it will stop people from breeding them. Looks like the FCI and UKC will disqualify a merle but the AKC allows "any colour - solid marked or splashed".
     
  8. househens

    househens Guest

    There have to have been adjustments. Look at the pug, bulldog, of 1910, contrast to today, to humankind's shame.

    In the cat world, in my lifetime, the persian has become a freak. I don't hate these animals, but what has been done to them.

    These days, every breed seems to be being pushed to breed standard limits to cater to the modern desire to cause jaws to drop, and stand out.
     
  9. Luz

    Luz PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,562
    Likes Received:
    81
    Apparently in Germany they recommend that Blue and Merle dogs shouldn't be bred from at all as they are more prone to deafness and Alopecia.
     
  10. Dober

    Dober PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,137
    Likes Received:
    226
    In my opinion, a breed standard should be there to improve the quality of the breed and not for any other reason. I have no problem with changes being made which are for improving the health of the breed, but in my opinion making it so faults wouldn’t be penalized completely destroys the whole point of the standard in the first place! People who say that obviously have no experience or knowledge on dog showing, or are trying to make excuses for their dogs who are not bred to type as to why their dogs wouldnt do well in the ring.

    Showing should be about grading breeding stock. The point is that no dog fits the standard 100%, and the standard is open to interpretation. Everything which deviates from the standard is a fault, and the least faults as possible the better. Breeding to standard is about breeding to better the breed, in my opinion.
     
  11. Sleeping_Lion

    Sleeping_Lion Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    21,576
    Likes Received:
    663
    Whilst I think that is the honest intention of some folk, unfortunately I don't think some breeds have been bettered by breeding to the standard, they've been exagerated instead. And whilst they are rewarded in the show ring, and people think it's cute to have a dog with a squished nose, or wrinkles, they will carry on breeding.

    I don't like the very long necks you see on some dobermans, yet that seems to be something some breeders are doing to better the breed. Where will it end? How long does their neck have to be before it's deemed too long and/or there's an associated health problem? Similarly with Labradors, I don't like the heavy set dogs or the extra weight some of them carry, it doesn't do them any favours and it's not needed, except some people do it to increase the likelihood of their dog being seen to conform to the breed standard, ie barrel shaped. It's Zasa's first show in about three weeks, I haven't got an ounce of extra weight on her, she's got puppy fat which you can feel her ribs through, but I refuse to put extra weight on a dog to try to enhance it's appearance, yet it's commonly done and advised to do so with Labradors to increase your chances of winning in the show ring.

    A lot of folk who show don't breed either, the original intention of the show ring was to show case your working dogs to either sell or promote your lines/breeding, but that has long since been lost I'm afraid. :eek:
     
  12. Thorne

    Thorne PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,914
    Likes Received:
    57
    Going back to the subject of merles, I can't understand why harlequin Great Danes are acceptable but merles are a disqualification. If harlequins didn't have the Harlequin gene they'd be merles! It's fairly common knowledge that merle-merle matings carry a high risk of deaf and blind "double merles" but harl-harl matings carry the same risk and I'm not sure how widely known that is.

    Why accept one colour but not the other? There'd be uproar from Dane exhibitors if harls were made disqualifiable on health basis, but equally there'd be uproar if merles were accepted, even though they've been in the breed longer than harls :crazy:

    Something is Rotten in Harlequin Danes
    Dog Coat Colour Genetics
     
  13. Modwyn

    Modwyn Guest

    Not sure how the standard can be affected, but in my opinion dogs should be bred for the integral well being of the animal (i.e. health, temperament etc) not to encourage people to shop for them by looks as if they were shopping for a frock or handbag. I wish the standard and those that purport to follow it could be more pro active in that department, but as with everything a lot of people (not all) are interested in making money. Not sure how breed standards can be altered to this end, very difficult issue.
     
  14. rocco33

    rocco33 PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    5,443
    Likes Received:
    770
    A breed standard is there simply to identify a breed and separate it from other breeds. It is a very loose description, open to individual interpretation which is why exaggerations appear.

    Take the labrador - the breed standard has actually hardly changed, but was done to differentiate it from other retrievers of the time, most notably the flat coat retriever. The 'well sprung ribs' of the labrador differentiate it from the flat coat, the otter tail again differentiates it from other retriever breeds. There is nothing that says how well sprung (or barrel shaped) they should be, but that is where the exaggerations start as some breeders think the more a particular trait is the better.
     
  15. rocco33

    rocco33 PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    5,443
    Likes Received:
    770
    The main consideration is whether or not they ARE evolutionary or, what I suspect is often more of a 'designer' desire. I know very little about Spitz breeds, but don't the eye colour and size differentiate it from other Spitz breeds?
     
    #15 rocco33, Oct 27, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2012
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice