The Dale Gribbles of the dog world aren't helping anyone but themselves. They'd rather defend show breeders who have dogs with ectropion and extremely short lifespans than actually talk about preserving dog ownership for the future.
The Clumber spaniel that was scratched from BOB at Crufts this year has even more skeletons in its closet.
This afternoon, Jess and I were discussing on Facebook whether this dog actually had ectropion or not. (I keep wanting to type entropion. That’s what golden retrievers get.)
She wanted to know what this dog looked like as a puppy, but we couldn’t find it.
But we did find the kennel that bred her.
Chervood Clumbers is located in Denmark, a country that is part of Scandinavia and thus has fairly tight laws on dog breed and a relatively progressive kennel club registry.
But even this doesn’t stop the problems that exist in so many breeds.
I forward the link to the kennel to Chris, who then went over the Rainbow Bridge section of the kennel– just to see how long these dogs were living.
The results were shocking.
Just from a cursory calculation of the average age of death of these dogs found that it was only 4.66 years.
Of their current 15 living dogs, only three are over six!
The average lifespan of a Clumber spaniel is about 10 years, which shorter than the average for a golden or Labrador retriever, which are roughly the same size. The Chervood Clumbers live less than half the average lifespan for their breed!
So these might be the winningest and best health checked Clumbers in the world, but the results of all that intense breeding for the show has resulted in dogs with greatly truncated lifespans.
Chris ends his post with a simple thought:
In light of this information, does the fact that this breeder pays for lots of health checks (and even publishes some of the results) matter? Heck, does the ectropion on their big winning bitch who was just denied Best of Breed at Crufts all that important?
People often don’t want to know that the bad guys are in power.
It’s much easier to tell yourself fairytale and believe it than actually confront reality.
These people would rather blame puppy mills, backyard breeders, and puppy mill operators for all the problems in domestic dogs. If a person crossbreeds, you’re the devil.
But if you produce tightly bred show dogs that are simply falling apart, you get all the plaudits.
Just not this year.
And because you don’t, you wind up whining like a bunch of pathetic children.
The defenders of this system remind me of Dale Gribble from King of the Hill. Everyone is out to get them, so you better go by Rusty Shakleford.
The truth is all I see are bunch of entitled little shits whining because the governing body of your sport decided to hold you accountable.
As Don Henley would say, “Get over it!”
“Some call it sick. I call it weak.”
You can call me and everyone I associate with an animal rights activist.
I’m not poking the animal rights monkey with a stick.
You are.
And one of these days, that monkey will grab that stick and beat you with it.
It’s gonna hurt.
But don’t say you weren’t warned.
It’s because of your selfishness and stupidity that all of this is happening.
And denying it and acting like Rusty Shackleford or some self-righteous defender of some holy faith only adds gasoline to the animal rights fire.
The bullshit has to stop.
Stop it.
[...] a shame. More here. * * [...]
So true they say we are giving AR’s nut jobs a big stick but it’s them that are arming the AR’s movement 7 with a lot more fire power than a bloody stick!
Excellent post.
stop whining everyone , the people who didnt get placed would be told to shut up and accept the decision so you’ll have to do the same for once.
“But the clumbers eyes where only sore cos it had been there all day ” well the vet was told to disqualify dogs with infected eyes or entroption, they where not told to listen to your sob story and make sentimental judgments so your feelings wouldnt be hurt. and other breeds managed to get through the day without getting sore eyes and failing their test.
Are any of these breeders going to have the balls to say yes my dogs eyes where sore today The vet was right. I’ll just have to try again next year.
Those numbers are meaningless. Many dogs are probably sold to other breeders or pet homes. And you have to sort them by birth cohort to get any valuable data. See http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/163/15/457.extract
They are no more meaningless than some of the health surveys I’ve seen which target only club members.
It is a biased sample because we’re looking at dogs they have that have died off while in their care.
The age of the living dogs could be biased, but this is not a long-lived breed at all.
Not a long lived breed, no, but in commenting that only 3 out of 15 of their dogs are over 6… another 7 of the dogs they currently own will turn 6 this year. They had 3 litters in 2006, and half the dogs they own are from those litters. Prior to those, they had only 4 litters between 1995-2005.
Before criticizing the age of death of the dogs from this particular kennel, I think you’d have to wait and see how long those 7 middle-aged dogs live.
and they are saying shows are for conformation and breed type not for health testing . unfortunatly they have shown that if you leave that down to the judges they will award health issues and turn them in to breed type.
Why should a crippled dog win over a healthy dog , is that fair to the healthier loser ? are there any campaigns for losing dogs who have been robbed of first place by a cripple ?
And as for boycotting the shows , ” I wont show at crufts because they health test now , all those people who are still entering their dogs and winning and passing the tests are evil backyard breeders ”
I think the average normal non show person would find that logic very odd.
Normal people would also think it odd when you show off your breed record holding champion show dog and say oh isnt he beautiful, he’s won sooo much , of course he has HD , cataracts, heart disease, epilepsy and lost an eye as his eyelashes rubbed a hole in it but showing is about breed standard so that doesnt matter
They already test for health anyway , male dogs must be entire and will be disqualified if not , That makes no difference to wether the dog conforms to the breed standard but they still get kicked out and nobody complains.
I’ve just heard a 3 year old dogue collapsed from heat exhaustion at crufts and later died though I am sad for the owner the dog was 3 !! that makes me damn angry . 3 year olds should not be dropping dead
Apparently it was laryngeal paralysis, not heat exhorstion.
A very interesting post Retrieverman….thank you for supporting our cause here in the UK. Jean…re disqualification of dogs that are neutered….no that doesn’t happen. The 2 testicles are part of the breed standard but they are not a disqualifying factor. That said, you’re not likely to get very far in a numerically large breed with a neutered dog. Bitches can also enter if they are speyed too…..but you need the permission of the KC to show either. You also need the permission of the KC if your dog has surgery that can affect it’s natural conformation. I know of people having been refused permission after patella surgery etc.,
Show kennels often only keep dogs for the time they are being shown and then rehome them to a pet home. That said, I don’t agree with that way of thinking…I could no more move my dogs on to make way for a new arrival, than I could cut off my hands. My dogs are here for life….and they’ll have a happy life with me too.
Thank you for supporting dogs.
Thanks for this revealing post. I posted a link to it on the Dog World Facebook page but it was promptly removed
Any links from this blog to Dog World are usually removed within just a few minutes.
That’s a pretty sad comment too.
What a sad comment. As long time rescuers of Saints, we know the kinds of problems that come with the loose-skinned, giant breeds & roll with the punches–it can be painful and expensive but we love the dogs. But to have small or average size dogs having a markedly shorter expected lifespan than these giants is nothing short of criminal.
I realize that these breeders have a lot of time, effort and prestige wrapped up in their current lines. But since dog generations are relatively short, they could start employing health & behavior-oriented breeding practices now & have championship dogs again by the F2 or F3 generation. These dogs would not only be of championship quality but would be healthier, happier & longer-lived than what we’re seeing now.
As a breeder, the single piece of information I’d most like to see on a pedigree is the age of death (or birth and death dates). Age and cause of death would be much better. Chervood Kennels deserves credit for a degree of transparency seldom found in the websites of high profile show kennels. . . even if what the transparency reveals a bad statistic.
Better to campaign to make the rest of the world keep the sort of pedigree data statistics as the Finns do than to dump on one kennel who has some bad stats. It would make things much easier for people who want to breed healthy dogs, be they show breeders, hobby breeders, backyard breeders, or commercial breeders.
Well said. Good post
The Clumber has ectropion but not as bad as te Neo.
PL DVM1980
Warning: Language
Love our Chop Chop, my fave saying is take a teaspoon of cement n harden the F#@ UP!
In Tucson, we say, “Cowboy the f*&k up”
Someone over here needs to do a documentary. Even short video interviews. This is too little for 60 minutes. Who else might do it?
Since you seem so concerned about pedigree dogs and dog shows, I am just curious what you think the breeders and the kennel clubs should do to improve things?
Open the registries and make them Appendix registries, like what currently exists for English shepherds and for many types of livestock.
We can also have a consortium of vets come up with problems that are the result of stupid fad breeding for conformation shows, and if a breed club won’t reform the standard and the training of its judges, then it will be suspended from the registry. None of these dogs were as super exaggerated in conformation when they entered the registry system, with the possible exception of sharpei and Neapolitan mastiff, which were developed into their present form in very recent times.
I’m not necessarily in favor of a big government solution, but the AKC is a nonprofit that calls itself ‘the dog’s champion.’ Maybe it ought to act like it for once.
I don’t understand, open registry? Isn’t that allowing mixed breeds in? Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of having purebreds and dogs shows?
I am writing a paper for school about this, so just curious the opinions.
Purebred is an artificial concept. It is not something that was ever used until the past 150 years. And in many breeds, crossing between breeds was allowed until very, very recently. None of these dogs were created by natural processes. Man created them all, and then arbitrarily put them into categories that we call breeds. A dog breed as it exists within the closed registry system is a contrived genetic bottleneck. It is not a bottleneck for any good biological reason. It is a bottleneck based upon human caprice and vanity. It has nothing to do with the dogs.
I’m sure you like black angus beef, right?
Most ducks are not “purebred” either. Mallard ducks readily hybridize with other ducks in their same genus, and a huge percentage of all mallards have ancestry from some other duck species that crossed in generations ago.
Wolves and coyotes hybridize in the wild. The red wolf, the wolves of Eastern Canada, and Eastern coyotes are all mixtures of wolf and coyote.
I hate to tell you that most black angus cattle have some hereford ancestry.
But I don’t see people breeding ducks for a purpose, such as hunting or herding or family companion? What about for those who want a certain breed or certain traits in a dog?
Also I have interviewed several breeders who have checked all their dogs for the proper tests and breed for health and looks as their priority. They appear to all agree that there are problems, but are trying hard to better the breed. Don’t you think this problem is more the puppy mills and irresponsible breeders than it is the majority of the show breeders? I know there are bad apples, but don’t you think most of the show breeders want to do what is right?
Show breeders are so full of romance and propaganda that a large percentage of them don’t care. The facts do not matter.
You are basing this on a false premise. Did people breed dogs to do things before there was a closed registry system? Yes. I believe they did. So it’s bad, bad argument to say that you have to have a closed registry system to have functional working dogs. Tell that to the Alaskan husky and lurcher breeders, whose dogs exist as crossbreeds.
Show breeders often like to throw out the canard that all the problems that dogs have are the result of irresponsible or backyard breders or those who intentionally cross dogs. It’s a smokescreen for the real problem: the closed registry system is just a system create to cause long term problems with genetic diversity and health. Not a single dog breed’s health has been made better within a closed registry system. Lifespan have gone two directions: they have stayed low and flat over time or relatively high and crashed.
Bettering the breed is another canard. You cannot better a breed within a system that is a contrived genetic bottleneck. You could better it by allowing new blood in.
But at the end, you’re dealing with people with a cult mentality, who don’t care about anything but the religious tenants of the faith. That’s the real problem with dogs. I suggest you do more research before writing your paper. You are seriously misinformed.
If you want to get informed, read these articles:
1. http://cynoanarchist.wordpress.com/2010/11/18/closed-registries-dogs-in-the-handbasket-to-hell-part-i/
2. http://cynoanarchist.wordpress.com/2010/12/13/closed-registries-dogs-in-the-handbasket-to-hell-part-ii/
3. http://cynoanarchist.wordpress.com/2012/01/17/unintended-consequences-or-why-i-wont-just-shut-up/
Most of what you’ve repeated are bromides.
I don’t do bromides.
Actually, yes, ducks ARE bred for a purpose. So are goats, sheep, cattle, pigs, and most other livestock you see at the county fair.
Ducks are either egg laying or meat ducks. If you’re raising meat ducks, you want certain predictable qualities in your ducks so you have good duck to eat and so you can predict your income from selling what you don’t keep to eat yourself. Egg ducks are similar, but selected for different qualities obviously.
But what if you mostly want eggs, but the ability to have a nice roasted duck every once and a while? You need to hybridize, because egg laying ducks are tall and thin, and not very good to eat at all. But meat ducks either don’t lay eggs, or not frequently enough to be worth it.
These kinds of traits tend to be tracked much better in livestock than dogs (cattle have truly impressive amounts of data on them, often managed by major universities) because there is more money riding on them.
Okay now I am really confused. Lets take Labradors for example, where there are thousands of them around. Isn’t there enough genetic diversity, that through proper testing and eliminating those with problems, they CAN make the breed better?
I am trying to base this on both sides of the argument and I am trying to do my research. Perhaps it would be better to email you privately?
Without doing some kind of genetic assays you cannot say that Labradors have diversity. Generally, a large population correlates with diversity, but not always.
What you need to do is forget dogs entirely and look at conservation genetics. Captive populations of rare animals are very good correlations for dogs within a closed registry. Conservation programs are very careful about utilizing as many animals as possible, and preventing overuse of single animals. Preservation of diversity is paramount and databases are utilized to match breeding partners. Don’t be under the illusion that these rare species can be maintained this way indefinitely; they can’t. Because there is only a small population of Tigers, for example, there are no outcross opportunities, and inbreeding depression and gene loss are inevitable. Conservation programs are designed to keep the breeding population going for as long as possible.
Dogs are not bred this way, in fact, in many breeds it’s exactly the opposite: overuse of popular sires and relatively few dogs from each litter are bred. No attempt is made to preserve diversity. Dog breeds are not species. Dogs as a subspecies of wolf are highly diverse, dogs as breeds are not.
There are many, many domestic animals that are bred within open registries, whereby an animal with an unknown background or cross-bred background can be ‘upgraded’ to pure within a certain number of generations.
“Purebred” as we understand the term today (dogs bred within a closed system) is a new definition. The old definition of ‘pureblood’ simply meant that the animal was of recognizable type (Collie, Greyhound, retriever) and it bred true when mated with another animal of the same type. Under this definition, one could outcross to another type to increase heterosis or hybrid vigor and then backcross back to the original type to return the dog to ‘pureblood’ status.
Even though the Yellowstone Grizzlys number in the 600s as their current population, they are still considered as critical because virtually all those bears can be traced back to the same 20 founders introduced to the Park. They are not very diverse as a group.
If you think Labradors still have plenty of genetic diversity , read the Imperial College research on loss of diversity in ten breeds 90% of their genetic diversity was lost in the last 30 years alone, due to closed registries, in breeding and line breeding, and use of popular sires. Once you have lost it, you cannot put it back in a closed registry system. Even trying to breed for greater diversity and lower COIs doesnt stop the process, it still continues inexorably but at a slower rate. Longer term the end result is still genetic disaster. For numerically small breeds , like mine, disaster sets in sooner than in larger breeds like Labradors
Yeah. What I’ve seen on Labradors is they are a genetically diverse breed. They had a relatively large founding population, which augmented through breeding in additional St. John’s water dogs, crossing with other British retriever breeds (especially flat-coats), some Chesapeake Bay retrievers, and even a bullmastiff. There may have been clandestine crosses with golden retrievers, Norwegian elkhounds, and rottweilers more recently.
You can look at the American coonhound breeds that the AKC has for conformation showing to see what “pure breeding” does to dogs. It’s only been a couple of decades -or less- for most of them, and already they are deviating from the dogs that I knew so well growing up.
My dad was a coonhunter all his life, until diabetes and cancer sidelined him late in the game. Those old coonhunters took breeding for utility very seriously and put a great deal of thought into the matches they made. I recall very well that Blueticks and Treeing Walkers (his breeds) were sometimes outcrossed to each other, or to other breeds ( Redticks-”English”, most usually but also sometimes to Black and Tans or Redbones). The dogs were healthy and vigorous, and with the exception of a very occasional cherry eye you just did not see health problems in those dogs. Now, it seems like every other litter you see has immune-related problems like demodex, high incidence of eye problems, etc. And the dogs’ appearance is changing, too: most of those AKC dogs are too big and sloppy-looking.