Pyramid schemes - the answer to dog breeding?

Great Debates
1

I saw the recent link here to herbalife and since took a look at amway and other pyramid schemes, and actually think I can think of a way they could be useful - breeding a great pet dog.

At present there are basically two ways dogs are bred. Either they are bred according to breed standards which usually specify things that make sense to the tiny number of dog owners who like to parade them around show rings for the admiration of others just like them - and by the way these lines are usually starting to show inbreeding and genetic diseases ranging from moderate to insanely severe and obviously cruel - or they are bred accidentally by lazy morons who don’t neuter their dogs. Neither seems a decent way of making good pets, which is what most people want.

So the dog market is absolutely crying out for the mass breeding of dogs whose genetics would have them as ideal pets - stuff like friendliness/lovingness, easy to train, intelligent, non agressive, gets on well with kids, doens’t need much exercise - that kind of thing.

And those sort of characteristics would also be quite easy to genetically engineer on an industrial scale. But there is a problem - most of these characteristics are just tendencies. Much of the personality will require being brought up in the right home environment in the first eight to twelve weeks, and that is something that no factory can do.

Enter the pyramid scheme. Without wanting to specify detail too precisely and have it nit picked away, the basic idea would be that you would sell the pups to one of two types of customer. Most of them would go to pet owners, who would have to by contract neuter them. The others would be bred according to company rules, either by the person at that level of the pyramid to make other pups to sell, or to someone lower down the pyramid so they had a litter to bring up and sell.

You would also need to introduce safeguards to make sure that no one was buying too many dogs and being cruel just to make money - there should be no targets, for instance.

But this seems a great way of getting a load of friendly good houses for dogs to be brought up in to me - and also a way of totally revolutionising the dog industry, which at the moment is imo pushing the wrong dogs on everyone.

2

It would make more sense to neuter the dogs before selling them outside the company. If you’re going to become the Monsanto of dog breeding, you should at least do so in the friendliest way possible - by making the breed inherently under your control instead of relying on threats against anyone who forgets to/deliberately doesn’t neuter their pet.

3

I agree in principle but my understanding is you shouldn’t neuter bitches at least, which I have most experience with, till at least six months. I welcome correction on that point.

4

I’ve fantasized about this idea for years, with various different details. I even picked out a name, The American Family Dog, aka The Amfam. Which name I am freely giving away, because I’m that kind of person.

The model I was thinking of was the creating and licensing of breeding franchises. Breed registries exist to give cachet to what is after all only a dog. They are a highly successful marketing strategy, which was thought up by a British cattle farmer in the early 19th century. Seeing how much being registered and exclusivated jacked up the cow price, people picked it up for all sorts of domestic animals. Anyway, only Amfams bred by franchise owners are eligible for registration, and to keep their franchise licensed the franchisees have to jump through the hoops you set, thus keeping the breed healthy, on track, and profitable.

Go for it.

5

I like the idea but suspect it would go south rather quickly because of the need for profits to support itself. When I get a dog I usually prefer to weight a year before nuetering just in case I want to breed her or him. AMFAM would have the potential for producing great family dogs if properly administrated. You would still need to have standards of sorts and then some kind of qualifier program to see if breeders could meet these standards. Farmers and country people have been doing this for hundreds of years based on their own needs. They go to the pub and brag on their dog and even show him off. Then they make deals on breeding him. Recognisable physical traits in dogs are indicators of behavioral traits.

6

My understanding is that this is essentially how dogs and cats are bred today by reputable breeders. If a animal departs from the desired characteristics, the breeder sells it as a pet with the requirement that it be neutered. So your only innovation is that your “ideal” critter is not a show dog, * per se *, but an ideal family pet.

7

Cite?

8

I know I just posted up there, and I do still want a cite for your (ridiculous) assertion, but this whole idea of yours makes me quite cross.

Millions of dogs (and cats and rabbits) are euthanized every day, all over the Western world. Most of them are, or could become, great pets. Society does not need an influx of your idealized perfect family dog, pyramid scheme or not.

Dogs exist in hundreds of breeds, precisely because there is no ideal perfect family dog. People want dogs for all sorts of reasons - as hunting companions, as family members, as lap-warmers.

I don’t want you to choose the characteristics of my next pet. I want to choose them MYSELF. And as a responsible dog owner, I’ll do my research and select a breed that suits my lifestyle, my training style, my household, and my own whims, thank you very much.

9

Millions every day? Really?

10

Sorry, hyperbole overtook me. I don’t have worldwide figures, but the US estimates are between 3-4 million dogs euthanized yearly.

11

Geez. Care for a can of worms?

It would be more interesting a discussion (to me anyway) if it didn’t get derailed into why-are-people-deliberately-producing-dogs-at-all, which wasn’t part of the OP.

The reason there are many available dog breeds has nothing to do with families needing different kinds of dogs. It has to do with marketing and the show ring. At any given time, there are about seven breeds which completely dominate the “family pet” market: a retriever breed (golden, lab), a guardian type breed (pit bull, rottweiler), a small fluffy cute breed (poodle, shih tzu), a small non-fluffy cute breed (chihuahua, beagle, small terrier, dachshund), and some kind of shepherd breed. Most people cannot name more than that number, so why does the AKC recognize some 150 plus? For hobbyists, and people who ‘want something unusual’. Not because there is a “need”.

Mutts make up most of the dog population. Some are so muttly they are more properly in the pariah-dog category, dogs that were never deliberately bred by humans. But most are simply a cross between two or three “pure” breeds, and have the characteristics of those breeds.

I know a lot about the purebred dog hobby and the whole “reputable breeder” thingy. Which is entirely focused on producing show dogs, with “pet quality” synonymous with “not a show winner”. Most average families have relatively similar needs in a pet, even if they don’t think so – they need a dog who is friendly, easily trained, undemanding, easily groomed, and who doesn’t incur vet bills simply from unfortunate genetics. These requirements have exactly zero crossover to what show doggers are breeding for.

Ordinary folks are indeed attracted to the exaggerated forms of show breeds, but it isn’t in their best interests, as the forms often are associated with health disorders which the show breeders accept as the price to be paid.

Physical breed traits are only associated with temperament traits because historically they were, they are usually genetically detachable and show breeders often do just that, if the temperament is a problematic one (ferocious, sullen, etc.). But like colleges, dog breed reputations have a long lag time before the public perception catches up with changed evidence. Virtually all dog breeds still used for some kind of actual work have divided into show lines and working lines, the show lines being typically nearly worthless for the original purpose. But true working dogs are not particularly adapted to living in a backyard and happily doing nothing all day either.

I am totally in favor of deliberately breeding dogs for suburban family needs, because frankly there is a huge market out there for a good family dog, and the only suppliers are either breeding for totally different traits (working, show), or breeding solely to pump out as many puppies as possible without any regard for any traits (puppy mills), or out of vague carelessness (my neighbors).

If such an enterprise is to have legs, it would have to be controlled somehow. Working breeds are controlled by the buyers: does the dog work? Show breeds are controlled by show ring: does the dog win? Other puppy producers are banking on the haplessness of the average dog buyer who doesn’t know how to pick a product. A great marketing strategy and a superior product could change that.

You, Simple Linctus, could be the person to do this.

12

There is no shortage of awesome pet dogs.

None.

There is a SURPLUS of awesome pet dogs, far exceeding the demand.

Therefore, this idea is dumb.

13

I disagree with the (rampant on the SD) characterization of dog breeders as evil crazy breeding monsters, driven to produce show winners - at any cost!!!

Most dog breeders care about their breed, and work hard to produce animals that are BOTH wonderful companion animals, and conform to breed standards. Yes, some standards are stupid. Yes, some breeds have extreme modification and crazy health issues. Yes, some breeds are more popular than others. That’s not my point.

My mother, a vet, and registered purebred dog breeder, bred three litters of beagles and two of basenjis over the last twenty years. One of the pups went on to a show home. The rest were desexed and were fantastic pets. Is she then a shady backyard breeder, determined to fill pet stores with her carelessly bred, unhealthy show rejects?

The dog fancy has its problems, but undersupply is not one of them. Nor is “too many whacky breeds.” The pyramid scheme proposition seems intended to solve non-existent problems.

14

Still, you seem to be addressing a non-problem. Despite the factors you describe, there is no actual shortage of dogs who make good pets.

15

Yes, and in fact the AKC and such have done more to set back dogs than all the puppy mills and even dog-fighting rings.
In my mind, they are actively evil.

16

Sure. The pound is full of pit bulls bred for fighting that were seized (and who, if caught early make excellent pets), the “dog of the last moment” (currently Chihuahuas) and mutts. Nothing wrong with a good mutt.

But other than those breeds, there is a shortages of quality pet dogs who are are pure breeds and not as I listed. You want a Shetland Sheep dog or a German Shepard, and you get a dog bred for certain weird “looks” that make horrible pets as genetic shortcomings are endemic, as witness hip displacia on a breed that was once a working dog.

17

I kind of agree with the op, the part about breeding for lifespan/good health/non-aggressive and other traits would be fantastic. deliberately breeding out negative traits instead of trying for a fixed look would seem to be common sense.

make them come in 3 basic flavors, small, medium, and large.

other than that I do think there are already a ton of dogs out there needing homes.

18

Undersupply of DOGS is not the issue. Neither is ‘too many whacky breeds’ (the odd breeds are rare except during a fad phase). I know many show dog breeders, and have my whole life. They are by and large very well-meaning people who want to do well by their productions. I certainly never intimated anything at all resembling the allegations in the above quote. I will stand by my assertion that they are not in the business of producing good pets, although those would be a possible by-product of their efforts. Show dog breeders select for show qualities, first and foremost, all other considerations are purely discretionary. Also, five litters in 20 years is atypical.

I’m not sure the OP is addressing an urgent need exactly, but it is still an interesting and worthy idea.

19

Guide dogs are basically bred in the method mentioned in the OP- except it takes a lot of infrastructure. Puppies are sent to volunteer raisers who agree to follow a detailed training regiment. At about 15 months they get returned for a full evaluation. Any physical problem (and when you are inbreeding there can be lots) gets the dogs neutered and placed in a nice home. Then they start training. Guide dogs of course follow stricter rules than dogs that would be meant for pets would - for instance they are taught to not pick up food lying on the ground, or to be distracted by other dogs or cats - or even squirrels. Dogs that pass get neutered and train as guides. Before this, the top specimens get pulled as breeders, like our last puppy did. She produced two other breeders in her breeding life, which is considered to be very good.
To ensure genetic diversity they have careful breeding programs including mating across the country. We hosted a visiting stud from Australia.
They’ve been breeding dogs since 1949, and any puppy who so much as growls at someone in anger gets career changed. So, the plan can work, but our breeder was worth something over $50K. So I’m not sure it is practical to raise pets. And I agree, there are plenty of dogs to go around already.

20

This is a great idea, I thought I was the only one who had an idea about breeding a new type of dog. The problem with breeding a new type of dog is what to do with all of the non conforming dogs. I suppose in order to get the new type of dog you have to breed several different types of dog together. Then you take the ones who best exemplify the characteristics you want and breed those together until the new breed is what you want. However there are going to be puppies who instead of having the best of the breeds you mate have the worst characteristics. I suppose in the old days this problem was solved with a burlap sack and a bridge. Now the breeders would have to find homes for the non conforming dogs or they would quickly be awash in dogs. Since there are lots of available dogs how do the non conformers get adopted instead of going to shelters?