3 ms·

I don't think you can make a blanket statement about whether you can manage to retain breed traits without damning the dogs. If I had to slap down a guess on w

I don't think you can make a blanket statement about whether you can manage to retain breed traits without damning the dogs. If I had to slap down a guess on what is going on. The #1 issue is targeting cosmetic traits that are anatomically not functional. The #2 issue is breeders not prioritizing health over conforming to the breed standard. Pet grade purebreds may not look quite perfect to a discerning eye, but they can be very robust especially if they are a working dog. If you control for #1 and #2 is there still a higher incidence of issues? Probably. Why would reducing diversity be a free lunch? Is it an ethical issue? Maybe. I mean I eat animals. I can't put myself on some high horse. At some point we make them to use so there is a balancing act going on. The fallacy to watch out for is conflating breeder behavior and outcomes with outcomes for the breed if bred "properly."

1457389 10y ago
> I mean I eat animals. I can't put myself on some high horse. At some point we make them to use so there is a balancing act going on Well I must say it is rare to see someone sliding down their own slippery slope, bravo.
- elif 10y ago
  I appreciate it. If a vegan made that point it would be instantly viewed as self-righteous and ignored. Source: I make that point a lot.
snerbles 10y ago
Genetic clearances are much more common in the world of working breeds, since there is a market pressure to have dogs that can actually function in their job. Demand for working titles (search/rescue, agility, hunting championships, etc) also selects for more physically capable animals.
- arielweisberg 10y ago
  I have seen so many working GSD with hips so bad they are quivering. They stick out like a sore thumb. The selection process for working dogs is not perfect either. It's always been security theatre where I see these dogs. Granted I also see perfectly good dogs with great temperments some of the time. Where working dogs are not status symbols, but a means to an end I agree there is market pressure. Assistance dogs in particular.
  - snerbles 10y ago
    I should probably have clarified that, where the focus is on physical performance and trainability. The focus on "sloped backs" among GSD breeders is a tragedy.
Retric 10y ago
The problem is population size, breeders rarely have more than a few hundred dogs and lose diversity though selection, which given short lifespans quickly leads to problems.
whack 10y ago
> I don't think you can make a blanket statement about whether you can manage to retain breed traits without damning the dogs. > If you control for #1 and #2 is there still a higher incidence of issues? Probably. Why would reducing diversity be a free lunch? You just answered your own question. Is it theoretically possible for any species (including humans) to be purebred/inbred while still avoiding the whole host of genetic disorders and health complications? Sure, anything is possible. Is it likely? Of course not. The video does a pretty good job of showing how so many purebred dogs have worse health compared to their mutt counterparts. You bring up a good point about eating meat. Most of us are willing to trade off animal welfare/suffering for human pleasure and aesthetics, so why not apply the same principle to dogs. One argument is that most people who adopt dogs do so with the genuine intention to love them and care for their welfare/health. In fact, people get so attached to their dogs that they spend a great deal of money to promote their health, and deeply mourn their suffering/death. Given this, it only makes sense for dog owners to adopt mutts.
- arielweisberg 10y ago
  You can't make the argument that a mutt is universally better than a pure bred either. A mutt is a random assortment of components some of which are not ideal for life in human society or what you want in your particular pet. Temperament is the most problematic because you can get a bad mix of drives and intelligence. I think the question is whether what you get by picking the components is worth the cost? You won't answer that question with anecdata from a farcical comedy video. IMO the video does a lousy job of making any kind of useful point. I suppose it's good for awareness. The video makes the exact mistake I warned about. You can't conflate what bad breeders do with what the outcome would be if all breeders were forced to conform to better standards or you find a breeder who breeds the way you want it done. Straight from the video, breeders breed parents and children and siblings. It's sadly common that it will have happened at some point with many breeders. It's also insane and if you buy from a breeder that does that you have done something wrong. If someone has some well thought out research comparing the outcomes of a known strong set of well bred dogs from a breed designed to be functional (for some definition) to a set of mixed dogs then we might have a way to quantify exactly what the cost is. Anything else is conjecture. There are other strong arguments to be made for adoption and mixed breeds. Possibly for people unable to muster the expertise to find a breeder. I still think it's conjecture, but at least more reasonable sounding. Some of those arguments apply to human breeding, but try having that conversation ;-)

1457389 10y ago

> I mean I eat animals. I can't put myself on some high horse. At some point we make them to use so there is a balancing act going on Well I must say it is rare to see someone sliding down their own slippery slope, bravo.

elif 10y ago
I appreciate it. If a vegan made that point it would be instantly viewed as self-righteous and ignored. Source: I make that point a lot.

snerbles 10y ago

Genetic clearances are much more common in the world of working breeds, since there is a market pressure to have dogs that can actually function in their job. Demand for working titles (search/rescue, agility, hunting championships, etc) also selects for more physically capable animals.

arielweisberg 10y ago
I have seen so many working GSD with hips so bad they are quivering. They stick out like a sore thumb. The selection process for working dogs is not perfect either. It's always been security theatre where I see these dogs. Granted I also see perfectly good dogs with great temperments some of the time. Where working dogs are not status symbols, but a means to an end I agree there is market pressure. Assistance dogs in particular.
- snerbles 10y ago
  I should probably have clarified that, where the focus is on physical performance and trainability. The focus on "sloped backs" among GSD breeders is a tragedy.

Retric 10y ago

The problem is population size, breeders rarely have more than a few hundred dogs and lose diversity though selection, which given short lifespans quickly leads to problems.

whack 10y ago

> I don't think you can make a blanket statement about whether you can manage to retain breed traits without damning the dogs. > If you control for #1 and #2 is there still a higher incidence of issues? Probably. Why would reducing diversity be a free lunch? You just answered your own question. Is it theoretically possible for any species (including humans) to be purebred/inbred while still avoiding the whole host of genetic disorders and health complications? Sure, anything is possible. Is it likely? Of course not. The video does a pretty good job of showing how so many purebred dogs have worse health compared to their mutt counterparts. You bring up a good point about eating meat. Most of us are willing to trade off animal welfare/suffering for human pleasure and aesthetics, so why not apply the same principle to dogs. One argument is that most people who adopt dogs do so with the genuine intention to love them and care for their welfare/health. In fact, people get so attached to their dogs that they spend a great deal of money to promote their health, and deeply mourn their suffering/death. Given this, it only makes sense for dog owners to adopt mutts.

arielweisberg 10y ago
You can't make the argument that a mutt is universally better than a pure bred either. A mutt is a random assortment of components some of which are not ideal for life in human society or what you want in your particular pet. Temperament is the most problematic because you can get a bad mix of drives and intelligence. I think the question is whether what you get by picking the components is worth the cost? You won't answer that question with anecdata from a farcical comedy video. IMO the video does a lousy job of making any kind of useful point. I suppose it's good for awareness. The video makes the exact mistake I warned about. You can't conflate what bad breeders do with what the outcome would be if all breeders were forced to conform to better standards or you find a breeder who breeds the way you want it done. Straight from the video, breeders breed parents and children and siblings. It's sadly common that it will have happened at some point with many breeders. It's also insane and if you buy from a breeder that does that you have done something wrong. If someone has some well thought out research comparing the outcomes of a known strong set of well bred dogs from a breed designed to be functional (for some definition) to a set of mixed dogs then we might have a way to quantify exactly what the cost is. Anything else is conjecture. There are other strong arguments to be made for adoption and mixed breeds. Possibly for people unable to muster the expertise to find a breeder. I still think it's conjecture, but at least more reasonable sounding. Some of those arguments apply to human breeding, but try having that conversation ;-)