Modesty sure does become our pugle friend. And I say friend in the losest sense of the word.
JoanEk, I'm not worried about you sending me nasty a PM, just thought you might want to take this discussion further in private. Since you didn't want to I will respond here.
A certain pugler admitted here all of the problems with the pug. How does transferring these problems to another breed of dog produce a healthier dog? I questioned why is one lining their pockets instead of trying to improve the existing breed. Why are "we" producing companion dogs that sell for hundreds when there are lower cost companion dogs sitting on death row?
So what if a champion sired litter's puppys aren't all registered? A dollar to a donut says that those people expect a healthy puppy without deformities or defective genetic conditions. Hopefully the champion sired litter was planned and wanted to improve the breed or stay true to the breed standards. If it wasn't it is just as wrong as purposely breeding 2 different breeds. What improvement or maintenance of a breed is met when a designer dog is created? I think you are smart enough to answer that one. Why does one produce anything? In our society the ultimate answer is the almighty buck. Look at any business, small or large, they produce goods and services and the bottom line is money.
Are their scoundrel pure bred breeders? Yes, there are. I know, because I've been burnt over the past 25 years. But, I also know of good breeders who either improve the breed standard or maintain the breed standard with their litters. Can we say that about the puglers, chiweenies ad nauseum?
I like him a lot better than I like most people. To you he's a dog. TO me he's an adopted son who is short, hairy, walks on all fours and doesn't speak clearly. I have no problem with any of these. <
I am curious as to how one would go about trying to improve certain breeds, lets say the English Bulldog. If one was to try and get them healthier and back to a more normal build, they obviously could not use show stock. To get this breed back to where they can breathe, not melt in the heat and reproduce naturally, what would be the plan?
If you used the least "typy" sires and dams, and kept breeding for natural whelpers, would the person be a "BYB?" Would show people cry foul? I believe this might be a reason for the development of the American Bulldog, but that is not helping the English Bulldog.
Alrighty then....Alicat, Joan & the like. One more time.....this is NOT a breeder friendly forum of BYB's, & Puppymillers. If you can't be a responsible breeder which you obviously can't then zip it! We are tired of listening how you make money off the backs of your dogs. Obviously there is no socialization for your dogs etc either, because you are sitting in front of your computer all day long trying to force people into thinking your way is the right way! News flash....it's not working. Now why don't you go play on the Millers forum where you're greeted with open arms & share your latest & greatest money making, corner cutting, techniques along with the best of them.
Shame on you for breeding poor quality pets that add to the already pet over population. That's all you obviously know how to do! Let your dogs, I mean "Livestock" do all the work while you sit back on this computer & argue your worthless points. Shame on you!
Can't stand the heat?.....Don't tickle the Dragon!
Rhonda, how dare you presume to speak on behalf of the rest of the board and tell me I'm not welcome here. Anyone can figure out the tenor of the forum, and anyone can tell that it takes more than one viewpoint to be truly representative of the users. Bite me.
Well, I just had a few questions about bettering the health of a breed. Someone, I believe it was Irish, said a true lover of a breed would try to help with the health issues, so I was just wondering how you would go about it with a breed like the English Bulldog, that has been bred to such an extreme for so long.
I think Joanek has said she does not breed. I have been "guilty" of breeding some Pom litters, a total of 7 puppies, all of which are healthy and happy in their homes. I get regular updates from their owners, and they are all happy with their dogs. I don't breed anymore, so you can take me off your list of horrible, evil people. I am reformed. :)
Lovemybabiedogs, it's an interesting question you asked, and agree/disagree doesn't really cover it. Because the term "mutt" did not take on any meaning until people started being in charge of dog reproduction and until a single area would contain more than a single type of dog. Before that, when dogs were in charge of it themselves, they were already developing into various distinct types because so many of them were living in isolated areas. I don't know how you feel about natural selection, but I think their environments had a great deal to do with the characteristics the dogs were taking on over time. Their only mate choices pretty much looked like them, because that's all there was. I think that means I agree, but only because before we started breeding them they were already taking on traits that made them look different from dogs that lived in other environments.
Harsh? Just stating the facts......oh & JoanEK for someone that just joined in November, you sure have been on a high horse from the get go. Re: breeding...whether you are or are not breeding, you sure seem to support unethical breeding for someone who doesn't breed. Do you just like to hear your selves type/talk? I have seen people like you on here that come & go. Pfft!
Oh...sorry....umm purebred dogs were "Mixed" with other purebreds many years ago inorder to improve a purpose by resonsible breeders. Such as hunting for certain game, Protection or various degrees etc. One of the oldest breeds is the Pharoh & also Ibizan Hounds. They were not bred by wreckless unethical breeders for the money. They simply were bred to improve a purpose.
I think this thread has run it's course. It's sounding like a broken record once again....
i can't believe i read this whole damn thread. nor can i believe i am responding, but i am so here goes:
great post rhonda ! though, myself, i don't think joan is really trying to promote bad breeding or puppymills. ali , however is, so spot on ! that one lol.
barligirl, i htink in order to *fix* the problems in some of these breeds, yes you would have to breed out of standard dogs. and yes purebred breeders would cry foul because they breeders wouldnt be following the almighty breed standard. i think , in the cases of some breeds, that the turn that has been taken is akin to the term "kennel blind" ... in this case it would i guess be considered "breed blind". imo, there is absolutely no good reason to breed animals with pushed in faces, not when that brachiocephalic trait leads to so many other problems. i would like to know, though, exactly what led to that specific trait being bred for, and why do they think it is a healthy trait to continue breeding for.
joanek wrote: One crucial issue of mixed breeds is whether they have fewer health problems than the pure breeds that are crossed to make them. This is not something that can be conveyed as "information" on a thread, because each side mistrusts the motives of the other. It takes direct experience and research.
20 years working in vet medicine tells me that hybrid vigor in dogs is a farce and does not exist. i can't say for sure, but i believe we see more mixed breed than we do purebred dogs and they come down with just as many health problems as do the purebreds. and in some cases, they come down with the very conditions that are prevalent in the breeds they are mixed with. one example, and i could list dozens upon dozens more, labrador retreivers are high on the list for lymphoma, currently we will be putting to sleep a black lab/shepherd mix that has lymphoma at the young age of 6. a rottweiler mix we just diagnosed as having bone cancer, which is another disease that is very common in the purebred rottweiler.
i could go on a bit more, just barely touched the few things i found of interest in this thread, however reading 8 pages of tiny print has left me with a terrible headache.
Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.
Good question, lovemybabiedogs, but a yes or no answer cannot address the extenuating circumstances.
For instance, a man murders another man in self-defense, he is asked, "Did you murder the man? Answer yes or no." Of course, he has to answer yes. He gets the chair because he murdered another man. He should NOT get the chair, because it was done in self-defense.
"...dog were once mutts and weren't just 'poof' born purebred." I answer, yes, but there are extenuating circumstances which makes a simple yes or no answer moot. It depends on what your agenda is.
So now, the Beagle is being added to improve the health of the Pug. Make up your mind...which is it? Money, health, or just pure companionship because of the buyers wishes?
You have no solid argument. Which is why I'm done with this thread. Thre's no sense in talking to someone who has no idea of what they are even talking about. You have no concern for the dogs, and you said it yourself that you don't care why they are bred. So you have proven everyone's point that posted against you before, perfectly.
Romp with the rest of the people who do nothing for the dog world.
The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way it's animals are treated. ~Gandhi
Well JoanEK I Guess you cant come off your highly educational, large vocabulary, pedistal, long enough to just let this go and agree to disagree...I honestly think you really like to argue and cause fights.
"geez joan. the op just re-asked her original question and wants an agree or disagree answer, not a philosophical disection. good lord !
to the op : agree '
JoanEK I think you should have taken dustys advice here.
Gbroxon, I understand what you said, and I have no agenda I just wanted to know opinions when I started this fourm however, I didnt know it would turn into a philisophical discussion. Because now honestly (embarrassing) I dont have a clue as to what half of you are trying to say because apparently, im not as smart as I thought and I cant even hardly follow along with the discussion, to type highly intellegent answers back to all of you lol!
Too smart for me, I suppose I mean what are you guys docters, lawyers, and psychiatrists oh and cant forget vets you know because we are on an animal discussion forum.lol
ilovemydogs06: Are you the one who started this thread? Your name switched for some reason. I made a mistake when I tried to give you an answer to your question. You sound young, either a kid or a young adult. And when I was a kid, it would make me mad when I thought somebody was talking down to me. When my children were kids that would make them mad too. So I probably go too far in the opposite direction. Your question had some things about it that I thought needed filling in. And I thought you would be interested because you seemed to be curious about what dogs used to be like before people started changing them. I'm sorry if what I wrote made you feel dumb, I don't think you are and I would not want to make anyone feel that way. Unless I thought they were being mean, but you were not.
***Edited By: JoanEK on 2/13/2007 11:07:55 PM*** Reason: k