The white Newfoundland golden
We mass produce all sorts of livestock with little regard to their long-term genetic health. Our goals in producing livestock is to get more eggs, more meat, and more milk. We are only concerned with production and marketablity of that product. Marketability does not mean the best quality. After all, most of us have never eaten pork from swine fattened underneath oak trees or tasted eggs from hens that got a varied diet from foraging. Marketability means that we will buy it, and they can still produce a lot of it. The animals are only good to the producer so long as they continue to produce. No one cares that a cow will die of cancer at 8 years of age, when it will either be butchered at 10 months or milked until it is 4. These principles underpin our production of the domestic stock we consume for food. The morality or environmental sustainablity of those agricultural practices are certainly contentious, but not nearly as contentious as the debate could be if the same principles were applied to domestic dogs.
Domestic dogs are not consumed in the same way. Domestic dogs, whether working animals or pets, are expected to perform a function that lasts their entire natural lives. It matters to us that dogs live at least 10-12 years. It also matters to us whether they get genetic disorders at an early age. We are also willing to pay far beyond the replacement cost of the animal to provide various medical treatments for dogs. This consumption of domestic dogs raises them to a level almost akin with humans, and the principles of mass production cannot produce good quality domestic dogs for their expected consumption.
That’s why puppy mill dogs are usually not as suitable as pets as dogs raised in proper environments. You cannot mass produce well-socialized puppies. It takes too much time and money. You cannot mass produce dogs free of genetic disorders. The cost of screening all the parents for all the genetic disorders in most breeds is very cost-prohibitive to a mass production.
However, fad breeding is much more easy to do with mass-production than with sane breeding practices. That’s why so many fad dogs suddenly appeared on the market in Victorian times. There were lots of dog dealers in those days. On the streets, they hawked all sorts of fads and novelties in dogs. The Industrial Revolution’s efficient outputs combined with social forces of democratization and imperialism to create a rather affluent middle class, which purchased these dogs with abandon. The middle class was spurring industrial output of rather useless things. Novel domestic dog breeds and strains were but one of the useless things people purchased. The bull terrier, the borzoi-muzzled collie, the giant Newfoundland, and the English white terrier were but just a few breeds offered up by the dog dealers of that day. (All of which were a major departure from their working form.)
The first comprehensive study of these habits came from the economist Thorstein Veblen, who coined the phrase “conspicuous consumption” in his Theory of the Leisure Class. Veblen argued that the rising middle classes and the working class were much more willing to buy novel things to make themselves feel like the upper class rather than demand things like better wages and more accountable government.
Thorstein Veblen
So what does all of this have to do with the end of the golden retriever?
Well, the golden retriever was a dog created for a purpose. It was bred for its color, but it was also bred to have a natural body, moderate bone and feathering, strong drive, high trainability, a tendency to show the retrieving predatory motor pattern, a good sense of smell, and very low aggression towards both people and other dogs. When you breed for those attributes you generally get a good dog. However, it is very hard to mass produce a good dog for the reasons I just described.
When you start breeding the golden retriever to be a pet, though, then you start to select for extraneous things. You start to bred for lots of bone and lots of hair. None of those things are useful in a working dog, which was why they were intentionally bred out of the breed. Then in Europe, you start to breed for extreme light color, not because the absolute best dogs in the breed from the beginning were of that color but because the breed standard was changed for this novel characteristic. Then Americans start breeding for it because it is a novelty over here. The new dog dealers catch onto this trend and start mass producing very light-colored goldens without concern about their temperament whatsoever.
Then people start complaining when the dogs start showing their breed typical high energy and obsessive retrieving motor patterns. So the dog dealers and pet breeders start breeding that out of them.
And then people start complaining that these dogs shed a lot. So they start breeding them with standard poodles.
And by the time this is all over with, you no longer have a golden retriever. You have a white Newfoundland dog or a white Newfoundland dog with a poodle coat that still sheds regardless of what the breeder told you about its nonshedding coat.
Mass-production away from working characteristics is what will kill the golden retriever in the end. I’ve noticed a very interesting trend over the years. All of the breeds I’ve been told to avoid because of “stupidity” and bad temperaments are those that were among the first breeds to be mass produced. And if you look at the breeds that still exist that were mass produced in the Victorian through the Georgian Eras, virtually every one of these dogs is a genetic basket case or a nasty dog that is hard to train. (Scottish deerhounds are the former; Skye terriers are the latter. Deerhounds may yet be saved through intelligent breeders, but the Skye terrier is probably going to go extinct in my lifetime.)
*Again, I’m not saying all “white” goldens are bad. If someone is breeding for the light color and for the proper temperament and working ability, I say all power to them. But I personally think the darker colors are better reflection of the breed’s historical conformation.
So, you hint at it, but I’m not sure–do you have an opinion on the “doodle” phenomenon? Is your opinion on doodles the same as on puggles or whatever-a-poms?
Genuinely curious.
Patti and I agree on this one. It is stupid to breed crap poodles to crap goldens or labs and expect wonders.
Thank you, flattie-n-Labbie! An intelligent outcross, with health, temperament and work ethic records on many generations of ancestors and a clear goal, shared by many breeders might be a worthwhile goal.
Someone who has three bitches of one breed, and three dogs of another, and mixes them together, comes up with a clever name and sells them with a high “designer hybrid” price tag with no health history or proof of work ethic might as well be breeding puggles. They aren’t breeding working dogs if they never work their breeding stock.
I personally find it particularly unimpressive when a deliberate cross mixes two different types of dog (without any history or real necessity behind the cross)… For example, a sporting dog and a companion dog, like the “Puggle”? Why?
What gets me is that “hybrid” dogs are being bred as pets—dogs bred deliberately and sold as pets should be the MOST genetically sound and MOST predictable in terms of temperament, size, health, prey drive/instincts, energy level, and other lifestyle/life-quality related considerations. You can’t (or at least, shouldn’t) “wash out” or retire a pet if it’s not what you expected!
It’s a free country, blah blah blah, but IMO, Buyer Beware.
(That’s my rant for today–sorry! Can’t help it.)
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying here, but I think people are under the delusion that all cross-breeding results in hybrid vigor. Breeding two already inbred strains together won’t work.
Agreed.
But what does “hybrid vigor” mean? From what I can tell, it means the breeder is crossing fingers and hoping that some unspecified, undiscovered, undesirable recessive genes prevalent in one breed will be masked by dominant genes in the other.
But that’s not breeding. That’s not even smart tenth grade biology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterosis
This is what they mean. It doesn’t always work.
When it comes to the dog world, I’ll stick by my original definition.
When I see evidence that someone can PREDICT with even moderate success “hybrid vigor” when mating two individual dogs of different breeds, I’ll call it breeding. Until then, I’ll call it rolling the genetic dice.
Which, by the way, is fine. Just don’t pretend it’s something it’s not, make a whole bunch of claims and promises, and charge a thousand dollars for it.
That’s exactly right. Goldendoodles shouldn’t be that expensive.
I’m not opposed to goldendoodles as a blankent thing. Assistance dog organizations do rely on at least some doodles. But they tend to be very strict on what they breed and what they accept.
For just pets, you can get a mixed breed dog at a very reasonable price. However, if we really had legitimate open registry dog improvement plans, I’d very happy. One exists with the Chinook breed.
Though I guess there are some breeds that yield fairly predictable crosses. But those dogs have a history, and have always been bred for a purpose, and if it doesn’t work the breeders take matters into their own hands–they don’t leave it to some family that’s fallen in love with a puppy. I’m thinking of some of the sled dogs. I’m also thinking of the Lacy dog you’ve mentioned, which was really interesting to me.
But in the pet world? I’ll believe it when I see it. If someone honestly thinks their doing it, well, like I said before–free country, and buyer beware.
Funny, Breeders today. Even, in their attempts to right the problems they’ve been the root of for generations, seem to lose sight of the fact that their own dogs don’t yield entire litters of perfect specimens. They roll the genetic dice every time they produce a litter and then selectively determine which pups will be a part of future pairings. Neuter and spay the rest then purposefully breed away from a color or a tail or an ear type or some other cosmetic fault determined by ancestors long gone and dead. They believe that pairing closely related dogs In their quest for the holy champion, yet in their blind ambition they selectively destroy the existing gene pool that they cherish. Then scratch their collective heads wondering why several generations later their beloved dogs are in a mess.
And they have the audacity to point a finger and call hybrids a problem. If they could step outside their bubble and look at what the rest of the world is seeing they’d find little to be proud of. Listen, not everyone is creating hybrids out of greed. But I can say for certain that when a female Flattie is bred time and again to the point where her kidney’s fail then its not because of hybrids, Its because of that breeder’s greed.
Some very important discoveries come about by chance. Not planned on purpose. It just takes an eye opening experience to realize the good that has just presented itself to you. And even in the face of the status quo, it serves best to continue onward. And allow time to work for you and eventually to prevail where the old school only expects failure. New blood, isn’t always accepted right away. I can understand that. But the Old blood needs to accept it. One day their precious breeds could be squaring off in field trials or conformation and they might see a former doodle mix mongrel that is now an acknowledged breed right there next to them, possibly even defeating them.
In order to make things right, sometimes it means ignoring the status quo and doing what you feel is best. Genetics won’t just fix themselves overnight. Not all Hybrids are an intelligent mix. But, some clearly are. Spaniels, Collies, Setters, Pointers, Hounds and Retrievers have all been in the same soup for generations. Knowing them is knowing their histories and acknowledging that they all at some point become a part of each others histories. To deny it would make us all hypocrites.
I’d be careful and skeptical of any scenthound crosses with retrievers. I’ve seen Lab/Bluetick coonhound crosses that were more like cartoon character Goofy than anything we could use as a working dog.
As for goldens, keep your eye on Youtube or spend the $3 for a day’s worth of Crufts 2009 video archives and search out the Golden Retriever Drill Team. Not all the dogs are light colored, but they are all heavy boned, hairy dogs. While still maintaining their reputation for trainability, gone are those gorgeous red, light boned field dogs from the line-up.
The GR drill team may show up posted by an amateur on YouTube, so you might be able to save your pennies and pounds.
Peter Green, the original terrier man, put up the Sealyham over an absolutely gorgeous Pharoah/ Kelb tal Fenek that made my blood sing, but that is what I expected he’d do. Now the Sealyham is a terrier that’s lost it’s purpose, and been replaced by other more ‘tractable’ pets in the house and in the field. And with that dysfunctional show clip, no sealyham could go down a burrow without dragging half an acre of brambles along with it. Sigh. In pursuit not only of the show ring, but for the ideal home and hearth companion, we have certainly played the game of unintentional consequences in breeding dogs. Perhaps the answer is outcrossing to related/ancestral breeds for some of our most afflicted lines. I don’t know enough about dog breeding to even guess. I do know, I want the AR contingent to butt the heck out of the show ring and all other dog sports.
Aha, found the video of the GR drill team.
I can’t watch more than 30 seconds of it. those dogs don’t act or look like golden retrievers! These dogs have what I would call very moderate drive. And they have that sheep-like look in their eyes that I see in so many English show retrievers.
I once volunteered for an assistance dog organization that had donated golden retrievers. In fact, that was the only breed they had. These dogs had been donated from field and show lines. Usually, they tried to use more field line dogs. But at this time, they had one field line bitch and 8 show-line dogs. The bitch was the same age as the dogs– 7 months– and she responded to far more commands than the dogs did. She also naturally took directed retrieves, which are very useful for an assistance dog program. The dogs had to be trained to retrieve using clickers! And they weren’t even remotely good at it. The director had decided that they needed to breed the red bitch because she was so advanced. However, they didn’t understand why she was so good. When she was a puppy, she wasn’t all bear-like and cute, and most people thought she was an Irish setter puppy. When I explained that she was a field line and that they are expected to retrieve and take direction easily from an early age, it was like an epiphany. The last dogs I saw working with them were all field-line dark dogs. (Their best show-line dog developed a heart murmur and hip dysplasia and weighed 90 pounds at 18 months).
But what I thought was interesting was when these dogs were demonstrated to elementary school children. They all thought the red, lightly built bitch was far prettier than the blocky, creamy yellow dogs. Children seem to get something that we adults don’t get about dogs. A natural body is far better than a distortion.
You notice I refrained from commenting about the drill team. I thought the dogs all showed what you have talked about…little drive and no spark, no joie de vivre if you will. In fact I thought the whole performance dull and lackluster. This is your bailiwick, not mine, so I left it to you to comment about what seemed obvious to me…goldens are changing and not for the better.
As for a development of golden doodles, or labradingleberries or whatever, I would wish for crossing to be done by the healthiest and soundest examples, not what is accessible to your average HVB, miller or BYB, pedigrees kept, available genetic testing done, performance testing done etc all prior to breeding.
If I were in charge, I’d make it so that breeding didn’t occur until the dogs reached maturity, were clear on their genetic tests, had passed at least one upper level performance test in their area of work, and if they were a companion breed had passed some sort of therapy type test before they were allowed in the Breed Ring. Then, if they were successful at passing those tests, they would be allowed to propagate their genes.
You have to understand that like procreative arts and crafts for humans, I don’t view dog ownership as an unalienable right, I view it as a privilege that is earned.
All I’m saying is these dogs remind me of sheep. They might be nice to have in the expensive real estate around Hyde Park, where I saw dozens of these dogs, but for their original purpose, dog sports, and having a dog that can move in an agile manner, these dogs aren’t much use.
In whippets there are bully whippets that are all muscle. I don’t think they breed true, but if they did, I’m sure someone would come up with a way marketing them as the newest fad in sight hounds. The long-haired whippet is marketed as the silken windhund.
I’ve been thinking about this all night–buyer beware when you buy a purebred, too.
And in the end, I love a great mutt as much as I love a great retriever (and believe me, neither of mine are perfect), but let’s not pretend either one isn’t what it is when it comes to combining the DNA. Purebreds=stacking the deck; mixed breeds=rolling the dice. Just depends on the kind of gamble you want to make, and “you pays your money, you takes your chances.”
I really don’t think hybrids are “the problem”. Someone who loves their doodle is alright by me.
But anyone that claims hybrids are “the solution” to the problems of having a pet–whether it’s size, shedding, temperament, energy level, health… whatever that “problem” is–should seriously consider keeping their own best stock and culling the rest through spay-neuter for several generations so they can back up their claims.
JMO. Now I’m done.
Okay, maybe I’m not done.
“But I can say for certain that when a female Flattie is bred time and again to the point where her kidney’s fail then its not because of hybrids, Its because of that breeder’s greed.”
A word in defense of the flat-coat community as I’ve experienced it thus far: I have never heard such a thing. Maybe I’ve just been lucky enough to avoid disreputable circles, but my experience has been that there’s no other group of people who defend their individual dogs and their breed and advocate for their health and welfare. If you’ve seen otherwise, sincerely, I think you’ve witnessed an anomaly, and I’m sorry for that, because these are some of the best people I know.
What you’ve described is not the type of breeder anyone I know would have anything to do with.
They believe in the integrity of the breed as a dual-purpose dog; they test their breeding stock in performance venues as well as the show ring; they are relentless in their quest to breed a healthier dog while maintaining what makes the breed special; they are honest about faults of all kinds and will ruthlessly cut off a line from their breeding program if a health problem presents itself; and they treat their dogs with the utmost respect and humanity, especially when it comes to breeding practices.
I can’t speak for them all, because I certainly don’t know them all. But that’s been my experience with those I’ve known so far.
Can Sengimage site an instance in the US of a FCR bitch dying of kidney failure because she produced too many litters please? I agree with flattie-n-Labbie. That is not a likely scenario. Maybe some of their “European Sister Kennels” do this?
In the US in 2008, there were 108 litters registered and 605 individual dogs registered. That doesn’t sound like the kind of mass-production that would lead to over-bred bitches.
Now let’s look at a proposed hybrid cross –
From a site on genetically based diseases for purebred dogs:
http://www.upei.ca/~cidd/intro.htm
Cocker spaniel, American
The disorders listed in the first 3 categories below are believed to have an inherited basis, or are known to have a predilection for this breed (“breed predisposition”). This means the disorder occurs more commonly in this breed compared to other breeds, or to the general dog population. Common sense suggests that these are inherited disorders, but for many breeds and many disorders, the studies to determine the mode of inheritance or the frequency in the breed have not been carried out, or are inconclusive.
We have listed disorders for which there is a general consensus among those investigating in this field and among veterinary practitioners, that the condition is significant in this breed. Where the mode of inheritance is known, this information is included on the linked disease page. The most popular breeds tend to have the most disorders listed because there is a larger number of dogs affected, and therefore more opportunity to recognize a breed predisposition to a particular disorder. As well, there is likely to be more indiscriminate breeding of these breeds, leading to a higher occurrence of inherited disorders. In less common or newer breeds, there may be no disorders listed or the list of disorders may be quite short, because it can take some time before enough dogs are affected to recognize an inherited condition.
The last category lists conditions that have been reported sporadically, and may be inherited in this breed.
1. Most important
These disorders are relatively common in this breed, and where possible, efforts are being made to eradicate them. Ask your breeder about these conditions in his or her dogs. These disorders seriously affect the health of your pet and may require medical or surgical intervention.
Retinal dysplasia
Seborrhea
2. Other disorders which have an increased incidence in this breed
These disorders occur less commonly or are less devastating than those mentioned above.
Atopy (allergic inhalant dermatitis)
Autoimmune hemolytic anemia
Cataracts
Ceroid lipofuscinosis (rare)
Chronic hepatitis
Coagulation disorder (factor X deficiency) (rare)
Cleft lip/palate
Corneal dystrophy
Distichiasis
Epilepsy
Glaucoma
Hip dysplasia
Histiocytoma
Hypothyroidism
Immune-mediated thrombocytopenia
Keratoconjunctivitis sicca
Patent ductus arteriosus
Persistent pupillary membranes
Phosphofructokinase (PFK) deficiency
Progressive retinal atrophy
Prolapsed gland of the third eyelid
Pulmonic stenosis
Sebaceous adenitis
Sick sinus syndrome
Vitamin A-responsive dermatosis
3. Disorders associated with conformation
These disorders are directly related to the conformation or standards for the breed. Although these conditions have in many cases become so common that they are accepted as normal for the breed, they can still cause serious physical problems and discomfort for the dog. One component of responsible breeding is to breed away from the extremes of conformation that cause these physical problems.
Ectropion
Entropion Note:The Vizsla Club of America has recognized entropion as an unacceptable problem in their breed, and advises breeders not to breed affected animals. Such leadership by breed clubs is important in discouraging this and other undesirable traits.
Exposure keratopathy syndrome
Fold dermatitis
4. Other disorders which may be inherited in this breed
These disorders have been reported sporadically, and may be inherited in this breed.
Cardiomyopathy
Familial kidney disease (renal dysplasia)
Intervertebral disc disease
Patellar luxation
Portosystemic vascular shunt
von Willebrand’s disease
Flat-coated retriever
The disorders listed in the first 3 categories below are believed to have an inherited basis, or are known to have a predilection for this breed (“breed predisposition”). This means the disorder occurs more commonly in this breed compared to other breeds, or to the general dog population. Common sense suggests that these are inherited disorders, but for many breeds and many disorders, the studies to determine the mode of inheritance or the frequency in the breed have not been carried out, or are inconclusive.
We have listed disorders for which there is a general consensus among those investigating in this field and among veterinary practitioners, that the condition is significant in this breed. Where the mode of inheritance is known, this information is included on the linked disease page. The most popular breeds tend to have the most disorders listed because there is a larger number of dogs affected, and therefore more opportunity to recognize a breed predisposition to a particular disorder. As well, there is likely to be more indiscriminate breeding of these breeds, leading to a higher occurrence of inherited disorders. In less common or newer breeds, there may be no disorders listed or the list of disorders may be quite short, because it can take some time before enough dogs are affected to recognize an inherited condition.
The last category lists conditions that have been reported sporadically, and may be inherited in this breed.
1. Most important
These disorders are relatively common in this breed, and where possible, efforts are being made to eradicate them. Ask your breeder about these conditions in his or her dogs. These disorders seriously affect the health of your pet and may require medical or surgical intervention.
none documented in this category.
2. Other disorders which have an increased incidence in this breed
These disorders occur less commonly or are less devastating than those mentioned above.
Cataracts
Hip dysplasia
3. Disorders associated with conformation
These disorders are directly related to the conformation or standards for the breed. Although these conditions have in many cases become so common that they are accepted as normal for the breed, they can still cause serious physical problems and discomfort for the dog. One component of responsible breeding is to breed away from the extremes of conformation that cause these physical problems.
Entropion Note:The Vizsla Club of America has recognized entropion as an unacceptable problem in their breed, and advises breeders not to breed affected animals. Such leadership by breed clubs is important in discouraging this and other undesirable traits.
4. Other disorders which may be inherited in this breed
These disorders have been reported sporadically, and may be inherited in this breed.
Elbow dysplasia
Progressive retinal atrophy
If I were choosing a cross to improve FCR health, it probably wouldn’t be cockers.
Shall I discuss Weims & bloat mentioned in another post? Bloat doesn’t mean a case of gassy indigestion…
“All I’m saying is these dogs remind me of sheep…”
LOL! I think I need to clean my screen, now!
Poor retrieverman… this’ll teach ya’ to mention doodles!!!
Those dogs look like sheep to me, too. :)
Have a good night.
I happen to know an FCR Breeder that did do just as I explained. Overbred her Flattie. Dropped 3 litters, 3 heats in a row and then it just died from Kidney Failure. And the Stud dogs were from other Breeders wanting a piece of that champion potential I guess. I don’t have to work CSI to know what the cause of death was. My Spouse and I were Livid. Yet we just brushed it off and distanced ourselves from it.
Breeders that exude integrity and have the best interests of the dogs first and foremost, don’t all congregate at the breed clubs. My experience with some breed clubs…. well, they’re sort of running on exclusivity.
In the Flat Coat Community, just as it is with any breed community, there is a mixed bag. Some are open minded and nice, some are greedy and some are disillusioned, some are really fanatical, some are friendly some are stand offish, sort of like how personalities differ with dogs. And we’ve met quite a bit of them. We like some, we could stand not to know some and really don’t care for others and pay them the same respect they afford us.
If the trend is to throw together dogs and mass produce, its not happening from where I stand. If its to produce a great dog, then I raise my hand. If its a backyard breeder or a puppy miller or a commercial breeder. Well I’d stand next to any of you to help shut one down. When the dust settles you find I’m not fighting anyone, just pushing back at all the bullies shoving me around because I’m not doing things the way they see fit.
There are plenty of unscrupulous people who exploit there animals for there own greedy purposes. Plenty of causes to take up to put a stop to more of the same. Just be careful who you point a finger at. Don’t wind up looking like a pot calling the kettle black.
There’s an outcross coming down the road. And I’m sure more of my sister Kennels will follow suit. There’s more than one angle to improve the genetic stock. Seems like the status quo hasn’t made a dent. So….. move over, please.
“Seems like the status quo hasn’t made a dent.”
I honestly have no idea what you’re talking about in your last paragraph, Sangimage.
But I prefer flat-coats un-dented, thankyouverymuch.
It’s a small breed, and an old one, and not without the problems associated with both those things, but proportionately it has more breed-champion working-titled examples than any other retriever, BY FAR. It’s a true working retriever as well as an excellent companion animal.
As a devotee of retrievers in general, I’ve got to say the flat-coat is pretty special just as it is. An outcross as an “angle to improve the genetic stock” is of absolutely no interest to me.
Dang–I just remembered that funny blue color on someone’s name means “click here for a link.” They should take away my internet license.
NOW I’m not nearly as confused.
I stand by everything I’ve said. In fact, if I could, I’d go back and put most of it in caps and forget a few of my good manners.
Poor retrieverman… for his sake, I’m going to bed.
“Yet we just brushed it off and distanced ourselves from it.”
Yeah. Ignore it, and try to remove any evidence of past associations?
Why not bring that to the attention of the FCRSA? Three back-to-back breedings is against their code of ethics.
Retrieverman, AFAIK the bully Whippet is a simple recessive that causes the double muscling. It is a by product of breeding for speed only, the dogs that have one copy of the gene are reported to be faster than a Whippet without the gene. IIRC the dogs with two copies of the gene have problems with lactic acid buildup.
The Long-haired Whippet is one of the foundation breeds of the Silken Windhound. They are not the same breed; the Silken also contains Borzoi and is a larger dog. The name is not just a marketing ploy.
Bully whippets do not breed true; you can’t breed a line or strain of bully whippets.
I think whatever the Silken is. It isn’t a designed to be working breed in the way that Tasy, Lurchers, and Kangaroo dogs are. The fancy name gives it away.
The only difference I can find between a longhaired whippet and Silken wind dog is that the long-haired whippet is not built like a show sighthound. And both seem to come from the same stock. It’s like the show greyhound and the racing greyhound.
Any time you separate essentially the same dog for really esoteric reasons today, it is a marketing ploy.
The truth is you’re far better off returning being lumpers rather than splitters in dealing with domestic dogs. The fact that there’s borzoi in one isn’t proof of much– it turns out that the other probably also has borzoi in it, too.
Actually, if you keep reading you will find that the Long-haired Whippet is likely the product of breeding Whippets and Shelties, not Borzoi and Whippets. That is why LH Whippets and Silkens both can carry the mutant gene that makes them sensitive to ivermectin, due to the Sheltie influence.
Since the bully gene is an autosomal recessive, yes, by breeding bully to bully, each with two copies of the gene, all the pups would be homozygous and you could develop a line of bully Whippets, like you could develop a line blue Whippets by only breeding dogs homozygous for blue.
A name for a type of dog that breeds true, a ‘breed’, is just that, a name. Whether it is silly and romanticized is not really relevant. The vast majority of Silken breeders are just as protective of their dogs as FCR breeders are and try to do right by them; I will save my contempt for people who breed two different breeds together, give it a cutesy name and a high price and bilk people who simply want a nice pet. AFAIK the Silken was developed as a companion breed and not a hunter.
There is a DNA test for bully Whippets. My understanding is that bullies can be quite variable in appearance, from freakish to almost normal but heavily muscled, a DNA test would be useful in differentiating.
http://www.vetdnacenter.com/canine-bully-test-whippets.html
F&L … Like I’ve said. And I’ve agreed with things that have been said. Breeding for health concerns first and above all else before championship concerns and cosmetics is a tough thing for some old school breeders to do. Especially when they’ve been doing it their way for generations.
Patti, you know how to reach me if you want to know the answer. But, the breeder in question may not have to answer to the Breed Club????? Unfortunately ????
I also often find that most people against what any individual is doing tends to make assumptions. Really broad ones. Often to the point of embarassing themselves. If we closely examine any breed, even hybrid, we’re sure to find fault with all of them in a long list of possible issues to be aware of in each breed. Perhaps we should question how it was done in the first place to create each breed. And wonder if some things were enough for those pioneers to say this is worth the effort. Having closed registries certainly wouldn’t have helped their efforts back then and definitely might have seen the extinction sooner of many breeds we see suffering today.
If there are any specimen in any breeders stock that exhibits the worst traits or any combination of the bad ones off of the list of issues then you clearly just don’t breed them. And if you breed the best of the best it would serve any of us well to keep in mind you can still see a disaster come of it. Again, no matter how much you sort through things or try to take precautions the odds are clearly stacked against a closed system. And for a small gene pool it’s even worse. Compound that by linebreeding then throw in the culling. Who’s pointing fingers and saying not?
Until there is a clear DNA map to use as the standard to be compared to, then no one really knows. So tossing and mixing is the answer for many of us. It certainly was for the people who created our breeds in the first place.
And F&L, I do keep the best examples and try to breed true. Like I said, time will tell.
Sangimage, I could go through your post line by line, but it won’t change either of our minds.
I guess I just don’t understand what you’re trying to accomplish by mixing a working retriever with a companion spaniel or a high-powered pointer (I read the “about” page finally).
Perhaps I lack a certain creative spirit, I don’t know.
If these are your dogs free and clear to breed, do what you want. Like I said, it’s a free country.
I’m still sorting things out, and discovering new things along the way. Hopefully in 16 years I’ll be able to say that my clients have all called me back and they’re all ready for another dog after living with their previous one for all that time. That would be the ultimate achievement in my perspective. And along the way the Families and Hunters who’ve taken our dogs will provide plenty of feedback. Who knows, by then the possibility of DNA markers could give a new target for breeders to breed for and eliminate cancer, control size, and find no more blindness or joint issues. But currently thats not an option. And if it were, many breeders would be faced with some extremely difficult choices. And considering where the gene pool is at now, actually cracking the DNA side of things could be the death knell for several breeds with limited genetic resources.
I often ask my “Genetic scientists” friends and family to either confirm or refute many of the things being brought up in these blog writings of my favorite Retriever historian. And frankly they all tend to agree with his assessment of the current state of Dogdom.
Once the Genetic maps are actually established and breeders still refuse to change then its very possible that the only success will be seen from those who did decide to outcross. That too is rooted in science.
Flatties dying prematurely and the average lifespan becoming shorter along with growing health issues. Thats rooted in reality.
For a breed that as you say has more champions across the line in every facet of competition its even more revealing as to why, when this breed is so controlled and the breeding stock is so limited, these dogs health issues have gotten progressively worse instead of improving. Like I said “the status quo hasn’t made a dent” towards any significant improvement. And at this rate it will become progressively worse. For what?
So that a person can associate some badge of honor with their dogs? Like somehow a dog appreciates that and covets another win? Another medal or ribbon or championship? Who are we kidding? A dog appreciates a good master that interacts with it and provides a good outlet for all that energy. Not a title. Hunters appreciate a dog that does what it was bred for. And a Family appreciates a dog that compliments their lifestyle, which is why not all breeds are a match for every family across the board. Double duty should mean a family companion and a hunter….. not a show ring and field trial specimen.
And on that way of thinking you’ll find I’m in the majority. And I’m no longer inclined to remain silent about it.
“And I’m no longer inclined to remain silent about it.”
I require silence of no one. I’m sure you don’t expect me to remain silent, either.
And just so that we’re clear on things–I think mixing a cocker and a flat-coat is silliness, and mixing a flat-coat and a weimaraner is flirting with disaster.
But if these are your dogs free and clear to breed, do what floats your boat. It’s not what floats mine.
I’m still unclear on how cocker / FCR puppies will improve the genetic stock? What is it about the conformation, health, temperaments, and working ability of the parent dogs and the dogs behind them that makes it likely that the puppies will be superior in some way worth replicating and reincorporating into the gene pools of the individual breeds? And, if the reason is to increase longevity and health, then why choose Cockers – a breed so rampantly riddled with health issues impacting their longevity? Both breeds are listed with a 10-12 year average lifespan – if you wanted to improve longevity, wouldn’t you choose a breed with much longer average lifespan, not to mention a similar phenotype?
Who are your sister kennels?
Actually, the flat-coat has a very short lifespan based upon morbidity data. Out of the three morbidity studies in three different countries, the flat-coat’s average lifespan is 9.02 years. http://users.pullman.com/lostriver/breeddata.htm#Sporting%20Retriever The golden retriever, by contrast, lives more than three years longer on average, as does the Labrador.
The American cocker’s life span is 10.66 years, which is pathetic for a dog of its size. American cockers aren’t used for work anymore, and there are so many lines that have really bad temperaments.
It can be said the same about many breeds today. And as far as stats go…. well some are are more relevant than others. If its all tossed in from other references then what good is it? Until there is a controlled group of dogs and a controlled study much of what we gleen from stats can be just as relevant as hearsay. I’ve spoken to two people who have had a Flattie for 14 years and 16 years respectively. So it is possible. Just the odds seem stacked against it. Well, I’m not a bookie. I can’t really take or make odds. But, currently it seems the odds of a short lived FCR are high. If the Cockers are supposedly in the same boat, you have a hard time convincing me since my last three cockers that all went off to the rainbow bridge all lived past 14 years old. One had diabetes, one had cataracts and one was just old. But all lived happy lives until they died.
And on the Cocker front… I know a few hunters who shave down their dogs and actually use them on hunts. So yes, its possible. Maybe not to your level of scrutiny, but definitely possible. Google that.
Why choose LAbs? Why choose Goldens…. there is always a reason to say “no way”. If we continue on the current path. One day We’ll just be saying “why didn’t we”. The excuses to continue on a failed path following a failed approach are far too many and to me that is silly.
As for Aggression…. NOT MY DOGS. You do see them on my site playing with my 5 children. The offspring of these dogs are with families that have children. Most of the Aggression seems to be coming from some old stats. I have yet to meet an aggressive Cocker. Thats not saying there aren’t any, just I haven’t met any. And none of my clients are coming back and saying my pups are now attacking their children, other animals or them.
Currently the Golden is the top three biter….. not a Cocker. And had I crossed a Golden and a Flattie I’m told by members of the FCR clubs I would have taken the same if not more heat for it. So why bother following the beat of that collective drum. I like the tune of mine better.
I had two goldens that lived longer than the average. 13 and 14 years respectively. Goldens have a lifespan of about 12 years. Flat-coats are about 9 years on average.
They had no aggression at all.
What I think is a better course is to demand that the various kennel clubs start breed improvement plans that do allow for intelligent outcrosses.
I’m not sure that American cockers are the best choice to use, because there are working cockers of very high quality. However, these are English cockers. There was an attempt to revive the field-line American cocker but it ran into problems with genetic diversity.
Golden retrievers might be the number 3 biter, but that’s because there are lots of them. I’ve seen a higher proportion of aggressive American cockers than golden retrievers. I’ve run into lots of aggressive American cockers over the years, and it may be that the lines you’re dealing with aren’t aggressive.
However, I’ve never seen one that got as birdy or as drivey as a working retriever or spaniel. I’ve seen more birdiness in cavaliers than American cockers.
The reason why your f1 dog is so drivey and birdy is that the dog is a throwback to the ancestral spaniel of yore from whence retrievers, water spaniels, land spaniels, and setters derive. But this f1 dog will not breed true. If you cross two f1’s you’ll get a mixture of working retriever and show spaniel characterisics.
This study involved crossing Newfoundland and a Border collie, then breeding from the result (skip down to where it’s highlighted):
http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:GXE-K4BofLAJ:www.bv229.k12.ks.us/biophilia/eniche/biology/evolution/4%2520Articles/Ascent%2520of%2520the%2520Dog.doc+gregor+pepper+newfoundland&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us&client=firefox-a
And the same study was done on wolves and standard poodle crosses:
http://www.goldendoodles.com/faqs/generations.htm
American cockers have lots of genetic disorders. They’ve gone through some severe fad breeding and puppy milling.
If they really wanted to breed a working American cocker, I’d suggest getting working English cockers and breeding them to less-coated and healthy version of the American cocker. That’s what I would do to improve the American cocker.
I get what you’re saying, but I would start my own registry and club system for my dogs and allied breeders. This was done with the Lucas terrier, which is started as a cross-bred terrier that was designed to save the working Sealyham: http://www.lucasterrier.com/
If you really want to pursue the Chatham Hill retriever as a strain, I’d suggest that you develop a large framework of similarly knowledgeable breeders. This was done in Germany with the Eurasier dog, which started out as cross between the Chow chow and the Wolfspitz (Keeshond) that later included some Samoyed. What you should do is publish something is a sporting magazine or a gun dog magazine that could get people interested in developing the strain.
http://www.fcrsainc.org/health/index.html
The breed standard-bearers are pretty open about all of this. Knowledge is power.
I’m aware of the problems just like they are. The fix however is what seems to be a point of contention. Complacent and waiting for science to either be the bearer of bad or good news? Then what? Do breeding practices suddenly change overnight? NOT. And if knowledge is power, the current procedure at correcting seems to be the same ones that got them in this situation to begin with. Asking the Biologists and Geneticists where they stand is really eye opening. The Gene pool is horrible. And current practices don’t do anything to improve it, they in fact continue to keep it on steady course for getting worse. Period.
Like I said. Things sound better from my vantage point looking in. Rather than sitting among them looking nowhere.
We Have an English Cocker now. and that was our next planned mix. We also have a Boykin Spaniel. So we are trying to plan ahead. But, The choices would still pull negative responses. At this point we already know they just don’t want anything to mix with their FCR.
And we’re just getting started here. But we do have sister Kennels on board with us from several locations around the world. We choose not to say whom because one of our sister kennels overseas was already harassed by some fanatical minded breed club members from stateside.
We also know from researching other Spaniel Retriever Mixes called Comfort Retrievers that the second generation breedings won’t always breed true, which would warrant as L&F suggests… keeping the best examples and doing it again. But, we need to remain aware of our own lines otherwise why bother if we just plan on thinning out the gene pool by line breeding or inbreeding all over again. And By the way, judging by the variances in look and feel of the FCR from all over the world…. I’d say they possibly still don’t always breed true.
What ticks me off is when the whole collective bunch tries to tell you what to do with your life. When it comes to that… then they’ve crossed the line. And only wind up driving me and mine to be more persistent and strive to succeed.
So, for me, this is the crux of the matter:
“And current practices don’t do anything to improve it, they in fact continue to keep it on steady course for getting worse. Period.”
What is the “IT” here? The breed? Its overall health? Its longevity specifically? Its working conformation and soundness? Its working abilities, including drive to retrieve, instinct to quarter, birdiness, mouth habits, scenting, trainability, biddability, style? Its temperament? Its age to maturity? Its energy level? Its size? Its coat characteristics?
What is the IT and what is IT you want to improve upon? How will IT be affected by what you are doing? What are your hypotheses? How will you measure your success? What are your criteria? What are you willing to lose in order to gain what you hope to gain? Are these things compatible with a dog that is a working retriever?
You’re trying to decide amongst an outcross between a Flat-coat and: an American Cocker, an English Cocker, a Boykin, and/or a long-haired Weimaraner? What you’re going for here is a genuine mystery to me. But then, none of my friends would call me a creative visionary, so maybe it’s me.
Hey–Free country, your dogs to breed (I’m assuming). Do what you want.
The genetic diversity for the breed in question. That was what we were discussing? Wasn’t it?
I guess thats the “IT”. Shall we name this the “IT” factor? If you wish to stand by a breed of dog that has a genetic diversity that is clearly on a level equivalent to many endangered species and still say there’s no problem. Well, then there’s the problem. Because there are plenty of breeders that seem to feel the same way.
Don’t assume. Go ahead and ask. Why be so stand off-ish.
Your answer is yes. My dogs. So does that make my decision better in your eyes? I think not. What did that answer change for me? Because I still feel that people who claim to be the end all be all are going to say no to whatever the outcross. If they had any suggestions they’re not giving one. And they certainly aren’t doing any outcrosses. So if they have a better idea, go ahead and do it. It would be a more positive effort than what is being done now.
Or “They” (and they know who they are) can keep on assuming they know the lineage of my own dogs and once again getting it wrong. Which is what I find so amusing.
I wish I knew the history on this blog better or I’d redirect you to entries that answer your questions more in depth L&F. I know I’ve read them.
Your vision for what you want to see in future generations is still lost to me. We’re just not going to have a meeting of the minds here.
My vision of a better flat-coat is not a smaller less-shedding curlier one with no birdiness or retrieve instinct; my vision of a better cocker spaniel is not a bigger one with cancer problems.
My vision of a flat-coat/Weim cross is frighteningly real: I see myself running after it blowing my whistle when it bolts from a water retrieve, and never finding it because it’s silently on point somewhere. I also see myself bandaging my hand from when it bit me when I tried to get it in the water.
The only thing we’ll agree on is that you’re going to do what you want. And because someday I may want to do what I want, I have no choice that demonstrates any integrity but to repeat that you are most certainly free to do what you want with your dogs.
I’m absolutely no one in the flat-coat community, so both of us going at each other is of no consequence anyway. The “they” of whom you speak may or may not be friends of mine, but I am not “they,” and happy to stay that way.
Good luck to you.
LOL. No F&L. Not smaller and curlier. not even less shedding. The first thing you finally did was admit that a Cocker could get Cancer problems from a Flattie. Yes that may be true. But A cockers line can also dilute the occurrence of cancer in the FCR. Maybe not eliminate it. But that would be assuming I’m choosing dogs from cancer stricken lines. Which is not the case. That is not to say they will never show signs of cancer, but if they showed signs later in life like more Goldens did..I’d take that. If they show less occurrence altogether even better.
And Long haired Weims make excellent retrievers, too as I’m told by their breeders and my partners. They in fact are considered a general purpose hunter not a specialized one like … well, like a Pointer. Its all in the training. You need to chill out and stop putting an abrupt assignment to dog characteristics. You do realize that German Pointers were mixed in the FCR lines along with Collies. Yet we don’t see FCR running off pointing at small game or herding cattle. I believe this also applies to Labs. You seem to only see things in the extremes with no levels in between. You don’t think our early ancestors bred their dogs true every time do you? They were more brutal on the culling process. But they obviously hit on something right by outcrossing to begin with.
The objective would be to eventually get specimens that breed as true as possible. Then cross back to the FCR lines. Getting it right still produces an FCR, with possibly some genetic advantages over the rest. Open up a bit, chill out and perhaps get back into many of the topics our retrieverman brought up already. Its almost like you missed a lot of reading. ??????
The LHW that come out of Massachusetts do have sheltie in their line, as the man who created them had both whippets and shelties. These dogs are sensitive to Ivermectin based products and carry the gene that produces that sensitivity which traces back to a popular sire collie in the late 1800s. I apologize for not listing the citations, but I lost them in a computer crash.
Anyway, the Silkens, which are basically a product of a woman from Texas, came from a combination of the Massachusetts dogs bred with small borzoi.
Although they have no “purpose” per see, both breeds because of their whippet and borzoi background, are keen to chase.
Bully whippets are a simple recessive gene of myostatin. The heterozygous dogs are excellent racers and usually faster than the AA or aa homozygous dogs, hence the practice amongst whippet people who want to win at all costs for breeding the heterozygous dogs together, even if a double muscled dog is produced in the litter and subsequently culled, or breeding a homozygous dog with a heterozygous one.
“LOL. No F&L. Not smaller and curlier. not even less shedding. ”
From your web site:
“While there are some variations, the concept is to “downsize” the Retriever and reduce the shedding…The desired result of this crossbreeding is a dog that looks like a much smaller version of a Retriever, maturing to 16”- 18” tall, weighing somewhere between 30-35 lbs. Some may call these dogs “miniature retrievers”. ”
I’m sorry if I’ve misread your material.
Yes that was cut and pasted from a Comfort retriever Website…. word for word. We’ve been tossing around when to change these words to better reflect our thoughts. And I guess you’re pointing that out is clearly a sign it should be done sooner than later.
So literally what you’ve read correctly is not my material. But it is on my site and soon to be changed to better reflect our endeavors. At the time we didn’t know what to call these and jumped on the Comfort bandwagon with the intention of just finding the first litter of pups homes and recouping the costs of the sonogram and c-section. That’s when Designer Dog Kennel CLub, a registry service for hybrids contacted us and told us we don’t have Comforts and that we should come up with a unique name for the mix.
So since they were Created here in Chatham Hill. We called them Chatham Hill Retrievers. And they’ve proven to be very much the retriever. So just like Flatties we nicknamed them Chatties. And now we have our own Chatties and Flatties as well as Cockers.
And all the pups from the first litter were called for before they were 4 weeks old. And this current litter was all called for before they were born. And several went to avid hunters. And there is already a waiting list for the next litter. and the one after that. All from different sets of parents and all on arrangements for possible breeding if we feel it is an exceptional specimen.
But then again the description you have cut and pasted once again does a good job of describing the look of the resulting mix. The desired result in our endeavor is ultimately a healthy dog. It just so happens to look and feel like a smaller retriever. And without question acts like one too.
The coat lays flat. And it has a proportionate stance. Its not heavy boned, nor is it beefy. in the opinion of our clients thus far. It is the right size dog for them. and hopefully it proves to be a healthy and long lived one too.
“And several went to avid hunters.”
Your avid hunters and my avid hunters must hail from different universes. I can’t even fathom such rapid acceptance of a miniature-looking flat-coat among the hunters I know.
I think you’ll be pleased to know I’m speechless.
So Sengiman is going to save flatcoats and create their own breed from an FCR whose father died of bloat, a FCR girl and an FCR boy that have the same mother that died at seven and a half, and a yellow flatcoat that had PRA carriers in his background.
Stellar.
and while the thought is still fresh. You do know what causes death from bloat right? I don’t have to explain how all dog breeds do not have a stomach anchored to their abdomen and all dogs are susceptible to bloat. Especially active dogs which are run too soon after a feeding. You do know this right? That you could potentially kill your own dog by running it too soon after a hardy feeding. I would never do that. Because I don’t want to see a dog flip it’s stomach over and die. That would be like an owner that doesn’t know about it’s own dog. Like in the Movie Marley and me. I remember that dog died of Bloat. Possibly from playin hard after it just ate, and judging from the movie… I’d say that was a possibility.
I am becoming exhausted, but I can’t let poorly-articulated ideas about these two conditions and genetics go unresponded-to.
For those reading who are not familiar with PRA–it’s impossible for sengimage, Patti S., me, or anyone else to adequately summarize what is known about PRA. It is rare in flat-coats, but it is an old mutation. It is found in many different kinds of dogs. It is hard to “breed around” because it does not develop until middle age. There is a genetic test in goldens and Labs, and under development in flat-coats (haven’t checked on the status in a while–I don’t breed–maybe this has changed?). If you are thinking of getting a retriever of any kind, you should research the disease and ask appropriate questions of the breeder. The breeder should be open about the pedigrees of his or her dogs and upfront about any occurrences of this eye disease.
Any dog can bloat. Some breeds are more susceptible to bloat. Some body-types within those breeds are even more susceptible to bloat. There is some evidence that some lines of dogs within breeds are more susceptible to bloat. The role of exercise, type of food, amount of food, when fed, how fed, etc. is sketchy at best. Any dog can bloat at any time. If you are thinking of getting a retriever, you should research bloat and ask appropriate questions of the breeder. The breeder should be open about the pedigrees of his or her dogs and upfront about any incidents of the condition.
No dog is perfect. Do your research, find a breeder you trust, one that publishes dogs’ ages, parentage, and health clearances; one that has a mentor and good relations in the breed; get as much information on the breed (or breeds) that make up your future pup; and when all that is done, take your chances and enjoy your dog.
Well said.
The Occurrence of PRA in Setters was almost devastating to the breed. Now because of DNA markers there is rarely any blind Setters found anywhere. Basically eliminating the disease. But is was due to a unified effort to breed away from it. Which means that once the marker is determined….. it may not necessarily be a good thing for a species of dog with a very limited gene pool to begin with.
Thank you, Sengimage.
I hope you will choose to publish the registered names, ages, pedigrees, and health clearances, and accomplishments of the dogs you are breeding, so that prospective puppy buyers have the knowledge they need to make informed decisions about whether the dogs are right for them.
Until you do so, I’m kind of at a loss as to what to make of your claims.
As you are not interested in performance breedings, I’m not all that personally curious about your dogs. But I love the flat-coat, and on principal want anyone else who is thinking of getting one to have all the information they can and to experience nothing but the best of the breed and its advocates.
“We have nothing to prove, we have everything out in front for those who aren’t looking to burn us at the stake.
Can you blame us for being so cautious in the face of fanatics?”
In my mind, if one is going to claim martyrdom, one needs to show the world everything he’s got. Lay it all out on the table.
But do what you want. I think you know probably what I think of mini-retrievers, yellow flat-coats, and claims of hybrid vigor. I’m not a customer.
retrieverman,
That’s the idea we’ve been proceeding with. We have our own chatties, flatties and cockers. We are planning to try our success at “breeding true”. And we already have people on board with us. Also now fans of this blog. Your ideas need to be heard. and if the registries were to exercise a bit of the common sense you bring to the forefront then Dogdom would have a much better outlook.
F&L
I do respect your point of view. Which is why I don’t push back to bend anyone to my way of thinking. And I appreciate your respect for my choices.
I’m far from a Martyr. Just cautious. When friends and family are subjected to the same stress and threats we’ve experienced. Well, you really have to walk in those shoes to know where we’re coming from. Until then I really can’t expect you to understand the reason for our caution. But I do ask you respect it.
I think everyone needs to take some time and cool off. Nobody’s changed anyone’s mind, and it’s all getting too personal. Let’s just decide to agree to disagree now.
Everyone who has a constructive comment is welcome to post here, even if you disagree with me or with other commenters.
Thank you