In the 70’s, we had two standard poodles (not at the same time). Suzy was my mother’s dog and guarded her fiercely, only tolerating the rest of us if not actually downright growly and snappish. But most of the time she was fun, to take for long walks, and she was always overjoyed to see me when I came home from school…the other, Nikki, was better tempered. She unfortunately died from diabetes. We sent them to the groomer for ordinary kennel cuts, only had them groomed in the classic ‘fancy poodle’ style once for fun. My aunt had a miniature poodle that was made much of, miniatures were all the rage. I didn’t care for Trixie, she was aloof, yappy, and of course grew obese and smelly in her old age. The dog, not my aunt, lol.
There are three roombas in our house. And they get combed every day because matting on long haired cats (and dogs) is horrible. (The dog, on the other hand, is butt shedding like crazy and hates to get it brushed out) They are very affectionate, and don’t mind the combing.
One thing I’ve noticed about the AKC/Purebred world is that there is literally nothing but scorn for any breeder who isn’t dedicated to “improving the breed”. Anyone breeding mix-breed puppies is trash, a backyard breeder or puppy mill, and both of those are said with equal and utter scorn. In the puppy-getting world, it’s like there are two virtuous paths: either your dog was a rescue, or you bought a puppy from a person who had genetic records going 200 years back, has a 3 year waiting list, and only places puppies with compatible horoscope signs. Everyone else is contributing to animal cruelty. Rescue people don’t think any dog should be bred, ever, and AKC breeders think if you aren’t working toward the breed ideal, is there even any point?
This means that if you are in a position where you want a family dog and the rescues in your area aren’t appropriate (here, it’s all chihuahuas and pit mixes), “reputable breeders” are only those people producing those breed-standard puppies for people who want show dogs, with pets being produced only out of the discards, as a sort of by-product. Everything else is treated like a puppy mill, even though I think some backyard breeders honestly keep their animals in very comfortable situations, follow humane policies, and produce good pets.
I dunno. We’ve always had little poodle-bichon mixes and they’ve always been great: laid back little floofs that don’t shed, love their people, and aren’t so smart that they need a full time job. I sorta resent the implication that such a dog is inherently unethical.
The problems you cite are not unique to one breed, at least as far as rage syndrome and “the Cavalier’s cardiac and brain issues”. “Leaky” heart valves are seen in a number of mostly smaller dogs such as Chihuahuas and dachshunds. Syringomyelia apparently is most widespead in Cavs, but is a problem in other breeds as well.
Suggesting that Cavaliers are somehow uniquely inbred and have an irretrievably polluted gene pool puts you on very shaky ground. That fact that there are gradations of neurologic malformation, some of which are asymptomatic and consistent with normal lifespan, would indicate a more complex pattern of inheritance than just one recessive gene, and offer hope that responsible breeding will lead to healthier dogs.
We’ve had three Cavaliers, two of which (siblings from different litters) lived long, healthy lives, the last passing on about 15 years ago. The third, a rescue, had a cardiac valve problem well managed by medication, and made it to age 9.
We briefly considered getting another a couple of years ago but didn’t feel it was worth the risk.
Yeah, I’ve run into that, too. And yet, my friend who breeds her pet once a year and goes on vacation from the proceeds of the puppy sales treats her bitch very well, and as far as I know, the puppies are healthy animals. (Yes, she makes money breeding her dog. It helps that most the costs of the dog are already “paid for” because she wants a pet. So her only expenses are a few extra vet visits and maybe some vitamin supplements or something.)
One thing I notice between the US and UK is the lack of small (Jack Russel sized) terriers vs chihuahua mixes in the US. The vast majority of the small dogs here seem to be some variant of chihuahua, and most of the small terriers you see have “chihuahua” shaped heads.
Cavaliers are certainly not uniquely inbred. All AKC breeds are inbred, some more than others, and Cavs are in the “more” section. Many problems of inbreeding are not purely breed-specific, but they are typically concentrated in just a few breeds. I picked on Cavs because their problems are on the poster-child level, not that there aren’t other candidates. There was, oh gosh 10 or more years ago, a big fat scandal in the UK about it. Breeders knowingly breeding top winning dogs who died in indescribable suffering not long after. And I forget some of the details. The interviews with those self-excusing breeders was a nail in the coffin of my love affair with purebred dogs that started with my grandma and I going to the Cow Palace benched show every year starting when I was five.
I’m just going to say this one.more.time. and then I’m bowing out.
The idea that testing and culling individuals with genetic health problems will “clean” a breed with a closed gene pool of already closely related animals is a fantasy. The unkillable fox is in the henhouse and you can’t get it out without opening the door.
Genetic testing and culling works when
- virtually all those responsible for matings are on the same page and are held to the same rigorous standard. (not remotely true here).
- there is a large founder base and many unrelated or very nearly unrelated, healthy, living, individuals of high quality to choose from (rarely true).
and/or - outcrossing to unrelated, non-registered animals who test clean is allowed
These conditions do not exist, so what is substituted is a lot of ranting about unscrupulous breeders and pious pronouncements about your own testing, which accomplish a little but can’t make much of a dent overall.
By the way, I am not saying mutts and crossbreds are necessarily healthier because they aren’t. Necessarily. Probably they don’t have a rare-except-in-this-one-breed inherited condition, but there are a lot of bad things that any dog can be prey to.
When I was little, we had a cocker spaniel. It was the only dog we had to rehome. Snappish and mean.
I had a Bernese. They are really beautiful dogs, and regarded as an exceptionally intelligent breed, with a usually gentle temperament and good with children and other dogs.
But there are some caveats. There is so much emphasis on breeding for looks and their classically uniform tri-colour markings that you have to be careful about possible deficiencies in either temperament or physical issues like hip dysplasia. I was relatively lucky with mine in terms of medical costs, although he did develop a neurological problem late in life that may or may not have been hereditary. Also, they tend not to live as long as most breeds. It’s said that if your Berner passes the 10-year mark you’ve been really lucky and beat the odds. They have thick double coats that need frequent brushing, and they do tend to shed. They’re also quite expensive if buying from a breeder.
They are truly a wonderful breed, but just some things to keep in mind.
Yeah, I don’t think I’d have one, but I do love seeing them at the dog park, especially the puppies. Man, kyootniz overload!
Collies were very popular when Lassie aired every week. They got a reputation for in breeding and multiple health problems.
Schnauzer I’ve only known one person that had one. Great dog but clippings get expensive.
Hounds, Blood hound, Bassett hound, Bluetick Coonhound etc. They were bred for hunting. Law changed and you can’t deer hunt with dogs. Hounds need lots of space. They can be destructive if bored. So there’s little interest in the breeds.
Except that it has worked.
"But the real difference between the Swedes and the English was in their registration system. Long ago, the Swedish KC decided to make health testing mandatory. For example, back in 1992, 80 particularly afflicted breeds had to have both parents hip-tested if the breeder wanted to use the KC registration system; they’d already seen huge improvements in Newfoundland hips. They also decided to simplify the scoring system so it was clear to everyone how to interpret the results. They created three bands to encourage improvement: If your dog scored a grade 2, you couldn’t breed on. If your dog got a 0, you could choose a mate with either a 0 or a 1 score. But if your dog had a 1, he/she had to be mated to a dog with a 0.
It was the organization’s first step toward making its registration a mark of quality rather than a mere record of parentage. As more and more health tests became available, they were slotted into the existing system and again made conditional for breeders using the system. It seems so obvious now that this was in everyone’s best interests and provided a firm framework for improvement."
Sweden kind of proves my point, or one of my points.
Your point that it’s a “fantasy” to think that testing can substantially improve dog breed problems appears flawed.
No. That under only certain requirements–which I posit as impossible in the US–could this idea become reality, and one of them is surely a means by which all breeders comply with science-based regulations.
All the registries I know about which have stringent requirements for breeding stock (of any species) are in Europe.
Good to see you qualifying one of your dogmatically* incorrect statements.
*sorry about that.
Our last dog, a Miniature Australian Shepherd (breed name now Miniature American Shepherd due to doggie politics), who lived to 12, was from a former show breeder who told us, on questioning, that her breeding goal was calmness. Sounded like an improvement to me, but more prominent breeders would not have agreed. On the negative side was a 12 generation calculated coefficient of inbreeding of 25 percent — high for an Aussie and our vet did not like it.
Our new Sheltie is from an active show breeder who professed not to be trying the push the breed in any particular direction other than whatever happens when breeding heathy champion types to each other. We haven’t done the research to exactly calculate Finchley’s coefficient, but I think it is unusually low. This means, I think, no improvement, but with a decreasing gene pool, perhaps avoiding deterioration should be the new improvement.
Writer Robert Ruark, in his “The Old Man and The Boy” stories in Field and Stream magazine (written in the '50s about the '30s), had a character refer to cockers as “pointy-headed idiots with all the hunting sense bred out of them.”
Makes me wonder how long ago cockers suffered the curse of popularity.
Dan
Jeez, terrifying!
Dan
I had a neighbor who had three Borzois. The dachshund I had at the time was afraid of big dogs, and he was terrified of these Borzois. One night, Olga told us not to cross the street when we saw them. She said her guys would not snap back even if Luc bit one. The Borzois were so calm, Luc just wandered among their legs and didn’t freak out at all. And best thing? He was fine with them any time we saw them after that. I was so grateful to Olga for that. It gave Luc some confidence when dealing with those HUGE dogs…like Orion, the German short haired pointer that lived in our complex.