Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Should pedigree dog breeding be banned?

245

Comments

  • #32
    Discodog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,135 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    ScumLord wrote: »
    The pedigree people would win out. One of the only times I got infracted was in that forum and I was told someone reported the post and once a post is reported it's an automatic ban/infraction so I'm not to keen on posting in there.

    Yes been there ;) I doubt if Seamus will be banning anyone without a good reason.

    Things are changing & for the better. Please give your input here:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056050934


  • #33
    Lily10
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31 ✭Lily10


    Discodog wrote: »
    We kill about 6500 dogs per year in our Pounds. Scotland, which has a similar human & dog population, kills about 800. We also kill about 10,000 Greyhounds.QUOTE]

    Exactly, we have a lot to answer for with the amount of killing we do at pounds. And it's only going to get worse. Every day there's more and more people bragging about their cute little pure breds. I've been in the pet forum a couple of times and it's sickening. All the talk about what breeder to use and what breed to get, no mention of the strays running around starving or the dogs killed every day at the pound. I once read that Ireland has the highest kill rate in the whole of western europe, I hope that is not true....


  • #34
    shinikins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,842 ✭✭✭shinikins


    Lily10 wrote: »
    Exactly, we have a lot to answer for with the amount of killing we do at pounds. And it's only going to get worse. Every day there's more and more people bragging about their cute little pure breds. I've been in the pet forum a couple of times and it's sickening. All the talk about what breeder to use and what breed to get, no mention of the strays running around starving or the dogs killed every day at the pound. I once read that Ireland has the highest kill rate in the whole of western europe, I hope that is not true....


    Unfortunately it is true, Ireland has the highest rate in Western Europe, and also one of the highest rates of animal cruelty.

    Lily you seem to have missed a lot of good threads in API, it's not all about breeders, i would be a big advocate of rehoming strays, there are more than a few animal rescue centres post there, and most of the chat there is about how best to treat your pets.

    In regards to banning pedigree breeding, thats never going to happen-there is simply too much demand for pedigree dogs from the general public. For instance, in the estate my parents live in there are 32 Bichon Frise. You might think that's not a huge number until you consider the fact that there are only 56 house in the estate. The best thing that could happen is strict regulation of pedigree breeding to ensure that more pups are not born with genetic abnormalities and health problems.


  • #35
    Little Acorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,531 ✭✭✭Little Acorn


    What causes the genetic problems? Is it only if dogs from the same family are bred together?
    Take for example a Labrador: Both it's parents were also Labradors [but not related].
    This Labrador then goes on to mate with another Labrador that it has no family connection to [whose parents were also both Labradors not related].

    Would the puppies of these 2 Labradors then have problems with their genetics, considering that the parents and grandparents were in no way related?


  • #36
    Fighting Irish
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,062 ✭✭✭Fighting Irish


    Would you be ok with breeding any other types of creatures? Snails? Ants? Rats?


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Mc Love
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,015 ✭✭✭✭Mc Love


    Pure bred for the win - our last dog lived for 18 years!!!


  • #38
    shinikins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,842 ✭✭✭shinikins


    Little Acorn wrote: »
    What causes the genetic problems? Is it only if dogs from the same family are bred together?
    Take for example a Labrador: Both it's parents were also Labradors [but not related].
    This Labrador then goes on to mate with another Labrador that it has no family connection to [whose parents were also both Labradors not related].

    Would the puppies of these 2 Labradors then have problems with their genetics, considering that the parents and grandparents were in no way related?

    Obviously, if the pup's parents and grandparents were not related there would be less chance of health problems. Think of it in human terms, if your maternal grandparents were cousins(Smiths, lets say) and your paternal grandparents were also cousins(Murphy's) then their children had kids, the chances of the Smith-Murphy offspring having health issues is greater. Now if the Smith-Murphy's had kids with yet more cousins, the health risks are greater again. Thats why humans are not allowed to marry closely related relatives.


  • #39
    Little Acorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,531 ✭✭✭Little Acorn


    shinikins wrote: »
    Obviously, if the pup's parents and grandparents were not related there would be less chance of health problems. Think of it in human terms, if your maternal grandparents were cousins(Smiths, lets say) and your paternal grandparents were also cousins(Murphy's) then their children had kids, the chances of the Smith-Murphy offspring having health issues is greater. Now if the Smith-Murphy's had kids with yet more cousins, the health risks are greater again. Thats why humans are not allowed to marry closely related relatives.

    Thanks, I was just confused about how it all worked, I didn't know if it was all of a certain breed of a dog were born with higher risk of problems, or if it was only if they mated with dogs that were relatives.

    I heard before that in humans, race could possibly determine a higher risk of certain diseases like diabetes for example, and thought that maybe it was something similar with the dogs, that certain breeds were just predisposed to certain ailments regardless of how they were bred.

    So, now I know it is mainly just the breeding with relatives that causes health problems in dogs.
    My boyfriend has a Rottweiller [very friendly], so was just wondering if there was a risk of health problems. His parents/grandparents were not related though, so hopefully should be grand. He's not had any problems anyways.
    Thanks again.:)


  • #40
    Lily10
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31 ✭Lily10


    shinikins wrote: »
    Unfortunately it is true, Ireland has the highest rate in Western Europe, and also one of the highest rates of animal cruelty.

    Lily you seem to have missed a lot of good threads in API, it's not all about breeders, i would be a big advocate of rehoming strays, there are more than a few animal rescue centres post there, and most of the chat there is about how best to treat your pets.

    In regards to banning pedigree breeding, thats never going to happen-there is simply too much demand for pedigree dogs from the general public. For instance, in the estate my parents live in there are 32 Bichon Frise. You might think that's not a huge number until you consider the fact that there are only 56 house in the estate. The best thing that could happen is strict regulation of pedigree breeding to ensure that more pups are not born with genetic abnormalities and health problems.

    Your right, I should take another look in API. There was one day in particular that it was so disheartening.. but I know all the threads can't be like that.


  • #41
    Bottle_of_Smoke
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,769 ✭✭✭Bottle_of_Smoke


    Meh dogs are simply visible. All the animals you eat, wear or medically benefit from are bred and used in the same way. Just they're bread for thick skin/tastiness etc

    If you actually enforced this it could lead to mass abandonment of hundreds of dogs.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Mits
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 154 ✭✭Mits


    I have a Doberman.

    I picked it because selective breeding gives a good indication of what you will end up with. For example temperament, size, intelligence and looks.

    Responsible breeders can limit the effects of gene pool damage. In the case of Doberman you are not supposed to breed dogs with an high hip score due to the possibility of Hip Dysplasia. My first doberman suffered with this but when I got me current dog I made sure the parents were okay.


  • #43
    Lily10
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31 ✭Lily10


    Little Acorn wrote: »
    Thanks, I was just confused about how it all worked, I didn't know if it was all of a certain breed of a dog were born with higher risk of problems, or if it was only if they mated with dogs that were relatives.

    I heard before that in humans, race could possibly determine a higher risk of certain diseases like diabetes for example, and thought that maybe it was something similar with the dogs, that certain breeds were just predisposed to certain ailments regardless of how they were bred.

    So, now I know it is mainly just the breeding with relatives that causes health problems in dogs.
    My boyfriend has a Rottweiller [very friendly], so was just wondering if there was a risk of health problems. His parents/grandparents were not related though, so hopefully should be grand. He's not had any problems anyways.
    Thanks again.:)

    I think the risk is lessened but it's still there. Ireland has such a small gene pool when it comes to pure breeds. Even here is the U.S, the "responsible" breeders will travel the length of the country to breed their dogs in a so called fresh gene pool. These dogs can still have problems. I always look at it this way, dogs are the descendents of wolves, so for a breed to all look the same, they all have to be extremely inbred. Not that I have a problem with purebreds, I have three myself. All rescues of course!


  • #44
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    From the day dogs started becoming accessories and their physical condition became less important than their looks, humans have completely f*cked up the species.
    I believe many of the breeds should be left to "die" out, instead of constantly breeding animals that have as many problems as a lot of dog breeds have.
    It is just plain wrong to breed, say a dog that can hardly breathe just because some idiot likes the look of a dog with a flat face. :(
    I could go on and on but what good would it do here. :rolleyes:
    And yes, we (the people of Ireland) should be utterly ashamed of our treatment of animals.
    Rant over.


  • #45
    shinikins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,842 ✭✭✭shinikins


    Little Acorn wrote: »
    Thanks, I was just confused about how it all worked, I didn't know if it was all of a certain breed of a dog were born with higher risk of problems, or if it was only if they mated with dogs that were relatives.

    I heard before that in humans, race could possibly determine a higher risk of certain diseases like diabetes for example, and thought that maybe it was something similar with the dogs, that certain breeds were just predisposed to certain ailments regardless of how they were bred.

    So, now I know it is mainly just the breeding with relatives that causes health problems in dogs.
    My boyfriend has a Rottweiller [very friendly], so was just wondering if there was a risk of health problems. His parents/grandparents were not related though, so hopefully should be grand. He's not had any problems anyways.
    Thanks again.:)

    The risks of any pedigree dog having health issues are alway going to be there, for most its simply a matter of time til they become apparent, i have an IKC registered Cocker at home, she's 13 now, and while most of her life she was in great health, she's developed dry eye over the last year, and has to have her eyes bathed every day and drops applied to prevent further damage. Because cockers have been bred to have longer ears she's at risk of serious ear infections. She's also at risk of developing hip problems. King Charles spaniels suffer with hip dysplasia, Rottweilers with arthritis, Great Danes and Irish Wolfhounds with heart problems, Pugs, with breathing issues(obviously), the list goes on. If you pick any pedigree dog they will have some sort of medical issues cropping up at any stage of their lives.

    The benefits of mongrels are the fact that they have such a wide gene pool that these issues are almost nil.
    From wikipedia
    The theory of hybrid vigor suggests that as a group, dogs of varied ancestry will be healthier than their purebred counterparts. In purebred dogs, intentionally breeding dogs of very similar appearance over several generations produces animals that carry many of the same alleles, some of which are detrimental. This is especially true if the dogs are closely related. This inbreeding among purebreds has exposed various genetic health problems not readily apparent in less uniform populations. Mixed-breed dogs are more genetically diverse due to the more haphazard nature of their parents' mating. "Haphazard" is not the same as "random" to a geneticist. The offspring of such matings are less likely to express certain genetic disorders because there is a decreased chance that both parents carry the same detrimental recessive alleles. However, some deleterious recessives are common across many seemingly unrelated breeds, and therefore merely mixing breeds is no guarantee of genetic health.
    Lily10 hit the nail on the head in saying
    Ireland has such a small gene pool when it comes to pure breeds.


  • #46
    Sheeps
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,763 ✭✭✭Sheeps


    ScumLord wrote: »
    I have a problem with the entire pedigree dog breeding industry ti's cruel and wrong. If you where to translate it into human terms it simply wouldn't be tolerated because no one would ever think it was right to force dwarfs or albinos to reproduce solely amongst themselves simply because you like the look of them.

    Many of these animals are picking up horrible mutations and deformities, some traits like the Rhodesian Ridgebacks ridge are actually a sign something is seriously wrong with the dog yet Rhodesian pups that don't feature the deformity are routinely put down at birth.

    Many of the breeds of dog where breed for a specific purpose and the fact they where working dogs promoted the breeding of healthy animals but now they're simply breed for looks and the health is becoming less and less of concern. Many working breeds are now so deformed they are useless at the tasks they where breed for.

    Miniature dogs are the worst example of this IMO, these are animals that simply couldn't survive on their own and many suffer from Syringomyelia where the skull is too small for their brain, in humans it's described as one of the most painful aliments known to man.

    Outside of working dogs there should be maybe one or two breeds, mainly a large and medium sized dog. After everything the species has done for us they deserve to have the over all health of the species considered.

    *I would have put this in the pets forum but it doesn't strike me as a place for debate and would be completely one sided.

    EDIT: Probably should have thought of putting a pole on this.

    I don't particularly give a shit.


  • #47
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Blue_Lagoon wrote: »
    Geeeeeeee, humans have been selectively breeding for thousands of years, why not their pets?
    I don't think its the breeding thats the problem, rather the practice of Eugenics, which we actually did try on ourselves at a few points in time, but its been widely looked down upon in the Post-Third-Reich era. Oregon had a law allowing for forced-streilization of the "mentally ill" as early back as 1983. One of the guys who first pushed for Eugenics, because he concluded deafness could be hereditary, also happened to invent the Telephone.


  • #48
    Yakult
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 7,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭Yakult


    Sheeps wrote: »
    I don't particularly give a shit.

    Is it cos' you're a sheep and no one gives a shit about you'r kind?


  • #49
    arybvtcw0eolkf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,608 ✭✭✭✭arybvtcw0eolkf


    ScumLord wrote: »
    The pedigree people would win out. One of the only times I got infracted was in that forum and I was told someone reported the post and once a post is reported it's an automatic ban/infraction so I'm not to keen on posting in there.

    You should go back over. Seamus is a moderator there now and has the forum moving along nicely, its a much more pleasant place to post now with a lot less bullying and bad moderating.

    Now, 'should pedigree dog breeding be banned' - IMO No.

    But I chose my dogs well, I've a Pitbull and Staffordshire Bull Terrier. The deciding factors when I was researching the breeds were any health related issue's (there's none outstanding) and their temperament with people, esp children and both breeds have an almost unrivalled (I can't be bothered spell checking!) reputation as being good with children.

    Like other's have said, I wish some people would put more thought into the type of dog their about to get, and look at shelters/pounds first. You'll find some beautiful dogs in them and have the satisfaction that you've rescued and given life (in many cases) and a home to a real under dog.


  • #50
    aN.Droid
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,911 ✭✭✭aN.Droid


    I don't know if this has been posted as I have not read the entire thread but Rhodesian Ridgebacks are no longer culled at birth if they don't have ridges, this was removed from the kennel club a while back.

    Not against pedigree dogs but am against the aggressive way it is being done. which is speeding up genetic mutations and ruining dogs.

    Mutts live way better and healthier lives its a fact.


  • #51
    getz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    Limericks wrote: »
    I don't know if this has been posted as I have not read the entire thread but Rhodesian Ridgebacks are no longer culled at birth if they don't have ridges, this was removed from the kennel club a while back.

    Not against pedigree dogs but am against the aggressive way it is being done. which is speeding up genetic mutations and ruining dogs.

    Mutts live way better and healthier lives its a fact.
    there are more mutts dumped on the road and in rescue kennels than any of the pedigree breeds, most dogs now live 30% longer than they did 30 years ago,without the show breeders most non-working pedigree dogs breeds would be extinct, i have had staffies and i have been in the show ring with them for 30 years ,its one of the lovely breeds that are still about only because of the kennel clubs, if a person pays out for a pedigree dog it will cost them a lot of money, so the chances are that they are going to look after it ,


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    ISDW
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,378 ✭✭✭ISDW


    I don't think that pedigree dogs are the problem, its the irresponsible breeding of these dogs that is the issue.

    I love siberian huskies, and have a few, I believe that no working breed should be able to be a champion unless they have proved themselves in their working field as well as the show ring. I am probably going to offend a lot of the husky owners now that show their dogs in Eire, but most of the show dogs, including champions here are not, in my opinion, fit for purpose. If you compare the Irish huskies with the ones from the UK, they are very different, much smaller. I was delighted with the Crufts best of breed this year, most people probably wouldn't have picked it as a husky, but it is from working lines and races regularly in the UK.

    The kennel clubs around the world need to enforce health testing, not just taking the dog to the vet to say its fine, but the tests such as hip scoring etc, that show if that dog is predisposed to heriditary conditions. Until the KCs won't allow registering of pups unless the parents have had all the relevant health tests for that breed, nothing will change.

    However, if they do implement things like this, then other registration agencies spring up, who will allow registration of litters with no health testing, bitches allowed to breed too young or too old etc.

    I have always had mutts until I got my first siberian, now I have a mixture of both. Funnily enough though, the top mushers in the world don't use siberians, they use Alaskan huskies, which are crossbreeds, but its like pedigree breeding, the kennel choose which dogs to mate to produce a dog that they want. These 'mutts' can then sell for huge money if they come from a top kennel, so really no different to pedigree, registered dogs, the breeders keep records of their breeding. So, maybe actually I've lost the argument, if crossbreeds are the best at what they do, yes, maybe we don't need pedigree dogs anymore? But, if these dogs are being purposely bred, then they still are pedigree dogs (their pedigree is examined closely to decide who to mate with who), just not kennel club registered.

    Unfortunately, it all comes down to people's greed again I think. Reputable, responsible breeders love a particular breed and so will only breed to improve that breed, but puppy farmers and bybs just pump litter after litter out to make money. And don't even get me started on the designer dogs:D


  • #53
    Shenshen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭Shenshen


    TheZohan wrote: »
    What difference does it make as to what breed he is? (not being smart)

    Lots of humans have conditions also. Should we stop people with genetic conditions having kids too?

    Isn't that exactly why we have legislation against siblings having sex?


  • #54
    getz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    not everything is as black and white as that,take the greyhound,the one who races is smaller than its show ring brother,one [the racer] is normaly dumped or put down by the age of six,the other [the show dog] lives a long and well looked after life,even the husky working dog is is of no longer use at a young age


  • #55
    Discodog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,135 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    I find it a shame that people choose a particular breed by what they perceive are it's characteristics. I have been bitten badly twice in my life, by a Golden Retriever & a Setter. I know of denigrated Pit Bulls who are wonderful with kids & Greyhounds that won't chase a rabbit let alone a Cat.

    People make assumptions about the breed that they want. Our dogs mirror us. If you are pretty laid back, like me, you end up with three laid back, friendly dogs. We joke about talking to animals. The facts are that dogs have evolved to understand us, they have made a huge leap, whereas humans have failed to understand dogs.

    A dog from a rescue or Pound may start with some hangover from it's past life in that it will go out of it's way to please you. But soon it will become your dog & reflect your personality. Dogs are individuals not breeds.


  • #56
    Dacelonid
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,112 ✭✭✭Dacelonid


    Overheal wrote: »
    One of the guys who first pushed for Eugenics, because he concluded deafness could be hereditary, also happened to invent the Telephone.

    Antonio Meucci???


  • #57
    biko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,060 ✭✭✭✭biko


    Pedigree show dogs (or cats) are one of the gayest things I know.
    They taken a perfectly healthy race and destroyed it, making it look silly with bulging eyes or no nose, building into the the race health problems that will kill it early (maybe for the best) and will be passed on to future generations, making the gene pool weaker.

    Tbh, this discussion is really best in Animals. We'll see how it goes.


  • #58
    Discodog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,135 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    I find it a shame that people choose a particular breed by what they perceive are it's characteristics. I have been bitten badly twice in my life, by a Golden Retriever & a Setter. I know of denigrated Pit Bulls who are wonderful with kids & Greyhounds that won't chase a rabbit let alone a Cat.

    People make assumptions about the breed that they want. Our dogs mirror us. If you are pretty laid back, like me, you end up with three laid back, friendly dogs. We joke about talking to animals. The facts are that dogs have evolved to understand us, they have made a huge leap, whereas humans have failed to understand dogs. A recent study showed photos of snarling dogs to kids - most thought that they were smiling.

    A dog from a rescue or Pound may start with some hangover from it's past life in that it will go out of it's way to please you. But soon it will become your dog & reflect your personality. Dogs are individuals not breeds.
    Sheeps wrote: »
    I don't particularly give a shit.

    Yes & the majority in Ireland agree with you which is why we are at the bottom of the the Animal welfare league. None of the parties in the next election will bother with Animal legislation. The proposed Animal Welfare Bill is dead so we face many more years as one of the very worst. There are no votes to be lost by killing dogs.


  • #59
    chrissymc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35 ✭chrissymc


    I dont think it should be banned but i am a groomer and i have dogs with all sorts of disabilities due to bad breeding come in to my salon the owners use their dogs to keep producing money making pups, they are upfront about this.
    Also people tell me their dog has a great pedigree and has lots of papers etc when i can see they have a dog with lots of problems that would never be able to be shown at shows."Papers" can be fake! I have rescue mutts myself and promote getting a pet from rescue centers or pounds, such a waste when lovely dogs are still being put to sleep because stupid people want a breed or designer dog.
    PS there are breed rescue centers as well if its that important to people why dont they get a dog from there?


  • #60
    getz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    my english bully loves everything, one local wild duck sits with him on the decking of my home,[i will have to learn how to post my pics on boards]


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    getz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    chrissymc wrote: »
    I dont think it should be banned but i am a groomer and i have dogs with all sorts of disabilities due to bad breeding come in to my salon the owners use their dogs to keep producing money making pups, they are upfront about this.
    Also people tell me their dog has a great pedigree and has lots of papers etc when i can see they have a dog with lots of problems that would never be able to be shown at shows."Papers" can be fake! I have rescue mutts myself and promote getting a pet from rescue centers or pounds, such a waste when lovely dogs are still being put to sleep because stupid people want a breed or designer dog.
    PS there are breed rescue centers as well if its that important to people why dont they get a dog from there?
    there are many lovely dogs waiting for a home that are still young but are no longer any use for their purpose,ie dogs for the blind ,and other service dogs,all need good homes,after their short working lives,without help from charity,most of these dogs would be put down,i have friends who spend a lot of their time[in the uk] standing outside the supermarkets collecting,


Advertisement
Advertisement