There is no quicker way to get me to anger than to spit out the phrase "Most dog breeds". The reason is that every, and I mean EVERY time someone says that it is 1.ALWAYS in regards to health issues and 2.ALWAYS followed by examples of COMMON breeds -OR- the Neapolitan Mastiff and Dosa Mastiff on the rare occasion. There has never been a general dog owner or dog loving person who has spit out this phrase followed by a rare breed other than the Neo or Dosa. Serious dog people will talk about the health of various rare breeds, but I absolutely can not recall any one of them ever using the phrase "Most dog breeds".
I have then asked people who use the phrase to tell me how many breeds are there. They never respond to the question.
In regards to health, most of the general public then throws out some of the most common breeds there are, like...German Shepherds. Boxers. Dachshunds. These are the breeds they use as examples for the over 300 different breeds and land races out there. The FCI recognizes 332 breeds officially with 11 more provisional breeds. This may not even come close to all that is actually out there. As more and more areas become connected to the internet, more and more people are popping up out of seemingly nowhere with a "Hey, this breed exists".
It is important to realize the number of breeds, because when you start talking about health, it gets muddy. You can't use a handful of popular breeds as examples of "purebreds" having health problems. And you sure as hell can't judge a book by it's cover, appearance is only a part of health in dogs.
Do you realize how many people are disabled but don't look like it? Various auto-immune diseases, heart problems, visual and auditory impairments, cystic fibrosis, etc. The wide scope of genetic diseases in humans, both visual and not?
I've come across far too many people who start talking about health in dogs and they go straight to physical appearance. People point out the Boxer's short muzzle, but two of the biggest problems are cancer and cardiomyopathy. Things that aren't obviously visual from the start. It's backwards thinking, to believe, that you can judge health on appearance.
The fact remains, however, that they still point out popular breeds that they refuse to research because they believe them sickly. Why not do more research? For whatever reason, they want answers given to them on a silver platter, and they accept the first ones they're given because it's dressed up in a neat little, simplistic package. They are given these handful of examples and reasons and use them to wipe the entire dog world with the same brush.
Fact is...no, most breeds aren't that badly off. Yes, all breeds can have genetic diseases occur. However, there is a popularity issue at play. The more popular a breed is, the more likely it is that there's questionable people breeding them, and breeding unhealthy examples.
At the same time, the rarer a breed is, the harder it is to breed away from genetic problems, and this is especially true in breeds that had almost been wiped out, creating a genetic bottleneck. Some of the middle of the road breeds are decently off, but it's not always the case. There's some rare breeds who are quite healthy, there's some popular and middle-road breeds that are as well.
When vets get involved, things get even more absurd. They run a business, they went to school to learn to deal with health related issues. They're not geneticists, they're not often involved in breeding any more, they deal mostly with....health problems. And, again, this becomes a popularity thing....the rarer a breed is, the less likely anyone is going to see it, including vets. So if they're using the examples of "purebreds are unhealthy because German Shepherds"......they haven't dealt with even a large number of breeds. You'd think they'd be more wise to the whole situation.
For the most part, from my crazy research and interest in the vast number of breeds.....most....aren't seriously unhealthy. Problems do occur, there are things to watch for, there may be a few common-ish problems, but typically the issues are not nearly as common as a handful of example breeds.
20 breeds out of over 300 isn't even a quarter of the breeds and landraces out there. On top of it, most breeds aren't "extreme" physically, so, there really is no reason to complain or say that phrase I hate so much..."Most dog breeds".
So stop saying it.
Friday, July 31, 2015
Wednesday, July 22, 2015
Dog Breeds And Hollywood Fame
In the movie and TV industry, whether animated or live-action, when dogs have been involved, there has been little to almost no mention to the general public that the simple fact is that these are professionally trained or, in the case of animation, fake, animals, and that you should do your research before acquiring any animal or specific breed.
The fact that no public service announcement of the sort has ever been standard in regards to animals in movie and tv, has caused some serious problems in the past and will likely continue to do so in the future. The general public will often see these trained animals as being typical of the breed, and they end up often liking what they see as they have no idea that it's common place to have multiple animals play a part in a movie, much less the amount of training that goes into these animals so they can play these parts.
The best example of the problem is that many people wanted their own "Pongo" or "Perdita" after seeing 101 Dalmatians, after all those spotty little puppies were just so adorable and would grow into elegant adults! However, the Dalmatian breed was developed to have a fair amount of energy. Those who expected the spotty pups to turn into easy going adults laying by the fire without any training or work, were surprised to find that these were active and athletic dogs! In addition, because of the movie and the sudden increase of popularity, there were dogs being bred to fill the market with little regards to proper temperament or health. It wasn't hard to find partially or completely deaf Dalmatians and those with temperament issues in shelters as they were surrendered by people who could not handle the breed's energy, much less a special needs one. Responsible breeders of Dalmatians were upset, and many Dalmatian rescue groups sprung up as a result. In the first decade of the 2000's, Dalmatian registrations in the AKC dropped by a whopping 90%, as the public interest in the breed died off from the live-action remakes.
This trend has happened multiple times with different breeds, and since the development of breed rescues, responsible breeders are always worried that their breed will be the next in the spotlight, increasing the need for rescue and foster homes for their beloved breeds to try and save as many as they can. The dogs are the ones who pay the price, sometimes with their own lives, simply because the public fails to understand that movie and tv is not real life, and that every breed has it's downsides that can make them unsuitable for the wrong home. In the future, I hope that the outcry from responsible breeders wanting to prevent their breed from falling into the wrong hands continues to ground and will hopefully encourage the movie and tv industries to encourage research before getting any animal.
In the meantime, with the movie "Max", right around the corner, social media has erupted to try and educate people that while, yes, Belgian Malinois are amazing dogs, this is not a breed for most people. Belgian Malinois can be very driven, and very, very high energy depending on the individual breeder's line. They do have an incredible amount of flexibility, capable of herding, police and military work, search and rescue, tracking, agility, flyball, and much more. This is a breed that can typically work all day and still be ready for action while you're ready for bed. Without the proper outlets and training, which can take a lot of time, money, and effort, the breed can easily become destructive.
And while the breed is highly trainable, it still took 5 different trained dogs to play one in the movie.
My own biggest concern, as someone who loves the various breeds, is that the breed is more popular in the working dog community than the show dog community, and many of the working lines are even more unsuitable for the average household. The pups are often started early on jute tugs to make the transfer to the padded bite sleeves used to train protection work and sports easier, and Malinois use their mouths a lot which leads to their nickname of "Mali-gator". As the working lines are more plentiful, they would be easier for the unsuspecting public to get a dog from. I can only hope that the working dog community also does their best to protect their breed from falling into hands that would not be able to cope with this amazing working breed.
For more on breed popularity due to movies, please see the following links:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140910152512.htm
http://consumer.healthday.com/mental-health-information-25/behavior-health-news-56/films-featuring-dogs-seem-to-boost-a-breed-s-popularity-691551.html
The fact that no public service announcement of the sort has ever been standard in regards to animals in movie and tv, has caused some serious problems in the past and will likely continue to do so in the future. The general public will often see these trained animals as being typical of the breed, and they end up often liking what they see as they have no idea that it's common place to have multiple animals play a part in a movie, much less the amount of training that goes into these animals so they can play these parts.
The best example of the problem is that many people wanted their own "Pongo" or "Perdita" after seeing 101 Dalmatians, after all those spotty little puppies were just so adorable and would grow into elegant adults! However, the Dalmatian breed was developed to have a fair amount of energy. Those who expected the spotty pups to turn into easy going adults laying by the fire without any training or work, were surprised to find that these were active and athletic dogs! In addition, because of the movie and the sudden increase of popularity, there were dogs being bred to fill the market with little regards to proper temperament or health. It wasn't hard to find partially or completely deaf Dalmatians and those with temperament issues in shelters as they were surrendered by people who could not handle the breed's energy, much less a special needs one. Responsible breeders of Dalmatians were upset, and many Dalmatian rescue groups sprung up as a result. In the first decade of the 2000's, Dalmatian registrations in the AKC dropped by a whopping 90%, as the public interest in the breed died off from the live-action remakes.
This trend has happened multiple times with different breeds, and since the development of breed rescues, responsible breeders are always worried that their breed will be the next in the spotlight, increasing the need for rescue and foster homes for their beloved breeds to try and save as many as they can. The dogs are the ones who pay the price, sometimes with their own lives, simply because the public fails to understand that movie and tv is not real life, and that every breed has it's downsides that can make them unsuitable for the wrong home. In the future, I hope that the outcry from responsible breeders wanting to prevent their breed from falling into the wrong hands continues to ground and will hopefully encourage the movie and tv industries to encourage research before getting any animal.
In the meantime, with the movie "Max", right around the corner, social media has erupted to try and educate people that while, yes, Belgian Malinois are amazing dogs, this is not a breed for most people. Belgian Malinois can be very driven, and very, very high energy depending on the individual breeder's line. They do have an incredible amount of flexibility, capable of herding, police and military work, search and rescue, tracking, agility, flyball, and much more. This is a breed that can typically work all day and still be ready for action while you're ready for bed. Without the proper outlets and training, which can take a lot of time, money, and effort, the breed can easily become destructive.
And while the breed is highly trainable, it still took 5 different trained dogs to play one in the movie.
My own biggest concern, as someone who loves the various breeds, is that the breed is more popular in the working dog community than the show dog community, and many of the working lines are even more unsuitable for the average household. The pups are often started early on jute tugs to make the transfer to the padded bite sleeves used to train protection work and sports easier, and Malinois use their mouths a lot which leads to their nickname of "Mali-gator". As the working lines are more plentiful, they would be easier for the unsuspecting public to get a dog from. I can only hope that the working dog community also does their best to protect their breed from falling into hands that would not be able to cope with this amazing working breed.
For more on breed popularity due to movies, please see the following links:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140910152512.htm
http://consumer.healthday.com/mental-health-information-25/behavior-health-news-56/films-featuring-dogs-seem-to-boost-a-breed-s-popularity-691551.html
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
If The Were No Dog Breeders In The Country....
This post comes about due to a dream that started me down the thought path, pulling me out of the dream, into the twilight between being asleep and being awake, and then finally into full alertness. I don't remember that path clearly, nor do I remember the dream at all, but I remember the feeling of sorrow that people....people know not what they do when they rally against ALL breeders, what that could lead to.
So, what could it lead to?
If breeding dogs/cats/whatever else was banned...
-Breeding would go underground. Any time anything goes underground, it is harder to regulate, harder to find, harder to make sure the animals have at least the minimum of care. Animals would be more likely to be used for profit without any care to their health or well-being by those who would break the law.
-Accidental litters could cost good people their freedom and more. Do we really need even more good people with no criminal history or violent offenses taking up space and tax payer's money over such a small thing? Aren't there more important concerns?
-Dog shows would pretty much cease to exist, dog shows which generate massive amounts of revenue, bring people together with old friends, and, despite politics and it's own variety of issues (like everything....find me one thing that doesn't have an issues across the board, I dare you), does help further breeding programs.
-Breeds would vanish from the country. This means the Otterhound population alone would drop by around 300-350 individuals, out of a worldwide estimate of 800-1000. It would bring multiple breeds closer to extinction, possibly bring some recently created American breeds to actual extinction, and cripple gene pools in a variety of ways.
-Various lineages would be lost, never to be regained, the dog world, globally would lose a lot of variety as a whole, making it even more difficult to eradicate genetic diseases.
-Only those well off enough to afford to import would truly have a choice in being able to get a breed-if importation wasn't cut off. Small farms scraping by wouldn't be able to get dogs that were more likely guaranteed to guard, rather than eat, their livestock for example.
-^-Those with special requirements would be relegated to taking a risk on what is hopefully a small-type pup, but could get over their expectations, putting them in a bind with landlords. Or someone could end up with a mixed that has a high drive, more than they can handle. The rich would be able to truly choose what they want, the rest would have to deal with whatever was in shelters and rescues.
-Those dogs in shelters and rescues? If breeding was illegal, chances are most of them, over time, wouldn't just be "street" dogs from other countries, but also flat out feral dogs. And having known someone with a feral dog-most people wouldn't be able to handle the special requirements to keep and maintain a true feral dog. Feral cats can at least be maintained on farms
-More "rescue" imports=more diseases coming over which may or may not be communicable to other animals and people. A dog imported from Mexico exposed family members and dogs it interacted with at a training class to rabies in 2004: http://www.naiaonline.org/articles/article/thriving-animal-shelter-businesses-assure-more-rabies-in-american-pets#sthash.H1irkpvY.dpbs
Growing concerned over the Asian Canine Influenza outbreak, which may have been brought over with the recent imports: http://veterinarynews.dvm360.com/canine-influenza-outbreak-caused-asian-virus-scientists-say
-To cease breeding of dogs, or any other animal, would be considered a win to animal rights activists, who want to see people cut off completely from nature, and it would steam roll from there, no more farms, no more meat, no more companions. I would think that they expect us to start living underground or in bubbles there after.
There are those who would see all of this as a good thing, everything that we would lose. Breeds, gene pools, companions, working animals.....they WANT them gone, they want us separated. I truly believe that these people see us as cut off from nature, cut off from life and the balance. The dogs that we share our lives with are a part of that balance, thousands of years of history together, walking, working, surviving. It would be a crime to cast all the diversity we created aside so blindly because bleeding hearts can't see the positives that so many of us live every day.
Do not let them win.
So, what could it lead to?
If breeding dogs/cats/whatever else was banned...
-Breeding would go underground. Any time anything goes underground, it is harder to regulate, harder to find, harder to make sure the animals have at least the minimum of care. Animals would be more likely to be used for profit without any care to their health or well-being by those who would break the law.
-Accidental litters could cost good people their freedom and more. Do we really need even more good people with no criminal history or violent offenses taking up space and tax payer's money over such a small thing? Aren't there more important concerns?
-Dog shows would pretty much cease to exist, dog shows which generate massive amounts of revenue, bring people together with old friends, and, despite politics and it's own variety of issues (like everything....find me one thing that doesn't have an issues across the board, I dare you), does help further breeding programs.
-Breeds would vanish from the country. This means the Otterhound population alone would drop by around 300-350 individuals, out of a worldwide estimate of 800-1000. It would bring multiple breeds closer to extinction, possibly bring some recently created American breeds to actual extinction, and cripple gene pools in a variety of ways.
-Various lineages would be lost, never to be regained, the dog world, globally would lose a lot of variety as a whole, making it even more difficult to eradicate genetic diseases.
-Only those well off enough to afford to import would truly have a choice in being able to get a breed-if importation wasn't cut off. Small farms scraping by wouldn't be able to get dogs that were more likely guaranteed to guard, rather than eat, their livestock for example.
-^-Those with special requirements would be relegated to taking a risk on what is hopefully a small-type pup, but could get over their expectations, putting them in a bind with landlords. Or someone could end up with a mixed that has a high drive, more than they can handle. The rich would be able to truly choose what they want, the rest would have to deal with whatever was in shelters and rescues.
-Those dogs in shelters and rescues? If breeding was illegal, chances are most of them, over time, wouldn't just be "street" dogs from other countries, but also flat out feral dogs. And having known someone with a feral dog-most people wouldn't be able to handle the special requirements to keep and maintain a true feral dog. Feral cats can at least be maintained on farms
-More "rescue" imports=more diseases coming over which may or may not be communicable to other animals and people. A dog imported from Mexico exposed family members and dogs it interacted with at a training class to rabies in 2004: http://www.naiaonline.org/articles/article/thriving-animal-shelter-businesses-assure-more-rabies-in-american-pets#sthash.H1irkpvY.dpbs
Growing concerned over the Asian Canine Influenza outbreak, which may have been brought over with the recent imports: http://veterinarynews.dvm360.com/canine-influenza-outbreak-caused-asian-virus-scientists-say
-To cease breeding of dogs, or any other animal, would be considered a win to animal rights activists, who want to see people cut off completely from nature, and it would steam roll from there, no more farms, no more meat, no more companions. I would think that they expect us to start living underground or in bubbles there after.
There are those who would see all of this as a good thing, everything that we would lose. Breeds, gene pools, companions, working animals.....they WANT them gone, they want us separated. I truly believe that these people see us as cut off from nature, cut off from life and the balance. The dogs that we share our lives with are a part of that balance, thousands of years of history together, walking, working, surviving. It would be a crime to cast all the diversity we created aside so blindly because bleeding hearts can't see the positives that so many of us live every day.
Do not let them win.
Saturday, April 4, 2015
If You're Gonna Have An Opinion On Mixed VS Purebred Dog Health, Then You Need To Know The Basics Of Genetics
Over the past week, I have seen multiple comments that have bothered me something fierce. At the core, it comes down to the simple fact that the general public doesn't know the basics of genetics, nor the modes of inheritance. And where as it seems rather cruel to expect everyone to know the basics of the basics, these people can't even draw the some of the same conclusions by looking at their fellow human beings. Which is truly odd, considering all the medical shows, both fictional and non.
Hell, even when there is an article that talks about a certain genetic trait in humans, and how it is a dominant gene that only takes one parent, I have still seen people go on about inbreeding being the cause. Reading is fundamental, sir.
My simple belief is, if you're going to have an opinion on something that has science behind it, know the damn science, even if it's just a little bit. So, this is what I'll be talking about today.
Dominant Gene: Only one parent is needed to pass the trait/disease at a 50% chance, and only one copy of the gene is needed for expression.
This means, if you have a human with Huntington's or a Brittany Spaniel with Hereditary Canine Spinal Muscular Atrophy, it doesn't matter how unrelated the other parent is (same breed or not), there is always a 50% chance of any given offspring getting the disease.
Recessive Gene: Two copies of the gene is needed for expression. If an animal or human only has one copy, it typically has no effect, and those with one copy are called "carriers". A human or animal who is a carrier, can breed to a non carrier, and will produce non-carriers and carriers. An affected human or animal with two copies of the gene, bred to a non carrier, will produce all carriers. Two affected will produce all affected. An affected with a carrier will produce 50/50 carrier/affected. Two carriers will produce 25% affected.
If you have a Siberian Husky who carries Progressive Retinal Atrophy and breed it to an Irish Setter that also carries Progressive Retinal Atrophy, you have now produced a litter of carriers and 25% affected. Congratulations, you have produced a genetic disease in the supposedly healthier "mix breed".
Polygenic Genes: Multiple genes combination to produce a trait or disease.
If you have a German Shepherd with A and B parts of a 3 part code for a disease, like say, Hip Dysplasia, and you have some random Boxer mix who carries A and C....you're likely going to get some Boxer/GSD/? mixes with HD.
Now, this is just a simplistic overview. There's also Sex-linked genes, mitochondrial DNA, and other factors that we're still learning about. Genetics is a fairly young science. Some health issues can even be caused. But the basics give you a basic understanding of how and why things can go wrong with the health of mixed breeds, why mixed breeds don't magically get a pass with health.
Now, in theory, if two breeds had completely unrelated problems that were solely recessive, could a mixed breed between the two be healthier? Possibly. But you still have to take in another issue that isn't related to genetic diseases, but the genetics behind conformation-how a dog is put together.
This area is tricky. We can't map out everything in dogs, at least not yet. However, consider two different head types. Now, some of the discussion I've seen has people saying that the genes for the top jaw and lower are different sets. So, if this is true, you could end up with a mouth in a crossbreed that is poorly put together and may cause the dog some issues, however minor. When you look at the whole picture, every part of the dog, you could very well end up with a mishmash of conformation that may or may not cause the dog to break down physically as it ages. Within an entire litter, there may be a wide variation of traits, and some may be fine, others may live a life of pain or discomfort from early on. It's Russian Roulette with genes, especially as the majority of people breeding crosses on purpose seem to do no genetic testing (because "mixed breeds are healthier", so why bother?) and have little to no understanding of genetics in the first place.
And we're not even touching on the subject of temperaments and drives, which....is one more very important factor in breeding.
All in all, it's important to go to a breeder who knows their lines, health testings, does something with their dogs, and has an understanding of genetics. Doesn't matter what breed, or even if it is a cross, it is. This is how you stack the odds of health in your future dog's favor.
But wait! There's more!
I'm going to give a basic run down of some facts.....
-Health tests are available for some diseases. However, the number of tests available vs genetic diseases out there is quite small, though ever growing.
-Health tests are often breed specific/limited to a number of breeds, as even though a number of genes are the same across breeds, not all are.
-Health tests should NEVER be confused with "Vet Checked". Health tests are DNA tests that look for markers, or specific testing to check body parts. Vet Checked is just a vet going over a dog/puppy to see if it is healthy at that point in time, and is no guarantee of future health. And sometimes, vets do misunderstand certain things that may be breed traits or common in development in a specific line-vets are fallible, do not make any rash decisions or get angry until you've talked to your breeder about the report.
-Health tests are not perfect, and because there are so few health tests compared to the number of diseases, there may still be something that pops up. Always let your breeder know so they have all the information possible to prevent and/or study such issues.
-Breeders, like vets, are fallible. If there really is a problem, approach with a clear and level head, try to have an idea of what you want to do regarding the problem, and ask what your options are. Flies, honey, vinegar, you know?
-Be mindful of the fact that even the best breeders are not psychic, and sometimes new problems in a breed will pop up with little to no warning. This is a fact of life.
-If ever you are angry about an unpredictable health problem with your pet, look to the world, look to your fellow humans. We have a right ol' mess of our own with genetic diseases. And you know what? You can't directly blame purity, inbreeding, or linebreeding for the majority of it. Unless if you want to blame nature for possibly squishing our gene pool a couple of times, if I recall what science suspects correctly?
Hell, even when there is an article that talks about a certain genetic trait in humans, and how it is a dominant gene that only takes one parent, I have still seen people go on about inbreeding being the cause. Reading is fundamental, sir.
My simple belief is, if you're going to have an opinion on something that has science behind it, know the damn science, even if it's just a little bit. So, this is what I'll be talking about today.
Dominant Gene: Only one parent is needed to pass the trait/disease at a 50% chance, and only one copy of the gene is needed for expression.
This means, if you have a human with Huntington's or a Brittany Spaniel with Hereditary Canine Spinal Muscular Atrophy, it doesn't matter how unrelated the other parent is (same breed or not), there is always a 50% chance of any given offspring getting the disease.
Recessive Gene: Two copies of the gene is needed for expression. If an animal or human only has one copy, it typically has no effect, and those with one copy are called "carriers". A human or animal who is a carrier, can breed to a non carrier, and will produce non-carriers and carriers. An affected human or animal with two copies of the gene, bred to a non carrier, will produce all carriers. Two affected will produce all affected. An affected with a carrier will produce 50/50 carrier/affected. Two carriers will produce 25% affected.
If you have a Siberian Husky who carries Progressive Retinal Atrophy and breed it to an Irish Setter that also carries Progressive Retinal Atrophy, you have now produced a litter of carriers and 25% affected. Congratulations, you have produced a genetic disease in the supposedly healthier "mix breed".
Polygenic Genes: Multiple genes combination to produce a trait or disease.
If you have a German Shepherd with A and B parts of a 3 part code for a disease, like say, Hip Dysplasia, and you have some random Boxer mix who carries A and C....you're likely going to get some Boxer/GSD/? mixes with HD.
Now, this is just a simplistic overview. There's also Sex-linked genes, mitochondrial DNA, and other factors that we're still learning about. Genetics is a fairly young science. Some health issues can even be caused. But the basics give you a basic understanding of how and why things can go wrong with the health of mixed breeds, why mixed breeds don't magically get a pass with health.
Now, in theory, if two breeds had completely unrelated problems that were solely recessive, could a mixed breed between the two be healthier? Possibly. But you still have to take in another issue that isn't related to genetic diseases, but the genetics behind conformation-how a dog is put together.
This area is tricky. We can't map out everything in dogs, at least not yet. However, consider two different head types. Now, some of the discussion I've seen has people saying that the genes for the top jaw and lower are different sets. So, if this is true, you could end up with a mouth in a crossbreed that is poorly put together and may cause the dog some issues, however minor. When you look at the whole picture, every part of the dog, you could very well end up with a mishmash of conformation that may or may not cause the dog to break down physically as it ages. Within an entire litter, there may be a wide variation of traits, and some may be fine, others may live a life of pain or discomfort from early on. It's Russian Roulette with genes, especially as the majority of people breeding crosses on purpose seem to do no genetic testing (because "mixed breeds are healthier", so why bother?) and have little to no understanding of genetics in the first place.
And we're not even touching on the subject of temperaments and drives, which....is one more very important factor in breeding.
All in all, it's important to go to a breeder who knows their lines, health testings, does something with their dogs, and has an understanding of genetics. Doesn't matter what breed, or even if it is a cross, it is. This is how you stack the odds of health in your future dog's favor.
But wait! There's more!
I'm going to give a basic run down of some facts.....
-Health tests are available for some diseases. However, the number of tests available vs genetic diseases out there is quite small, though ever growing.
-Health tests are often breed specific/limited to a number of breeds, as even though a number of genes are the same across breeds, not all are.
-Health tests should NEVER be confused with "Vet Checked". Health tests are DNA tests that look for markers, or specific testing to check body parts. Vet Checked is just a vet going over a dog/puppy to see if it is healthy at that point in time, and is no guarantee of future health. And sometimes, vets do misunderstand certain things that may be breed traits or common in development in a specific line-vets are fallible, do not make any rash decisions or get angry until you've talked to your breeder about the report.
-Health tests are not perfect, and because there are so few health tests compared to the number of diseases, there may still be something that pops up. Always let your breeder know so they have all the information possible to prevent and/or study such issues.
-Breeders, like vets, are fallible. If there really is a problem, approach with a clear and level head, try to have an idea of what you want to do regarding the problem, and ask what your options are. Flies, honey, vinegar, you know?
-Be mindful of the fact that even the best breeders are not psychic, and sometimes new problems in a breed will pop up with little to no warning. This is a fact of life.
-If ever you are angry about an unpredictable health problem with your pet, look to the world, look to your fellow humans. We have a right ol' mess of our own with genetic diseases. And you know what? You can't directly blame purity, inbreeding, or linebreeding for the majority of it. Unless if you want to blame nature for possibly squishing our gene pool a couple of times, if I recall what science suspects correctly?
Thursday, February 19, 2015
"The Puli Lady" At Westminster
There's been tons of talk in the dog world about the. Some bad, some good, some meh.
My thoughts?
I don't care what a handler wears, so long as it's not hindering the handling or presentation of the dog.
If anything, she was probably more relatable to the general public watching the show than those who were dressed up. And the fancy kinda needs more of that.
I get that it's a big, prestigious, and hell, even glamorous show. And I'm not saying the fancy should do away with that. But at the same time.....maybe there should be a little thought put into how being so fancy as a fancy may make it seem that the sport is only for the well-off who have money to spare for sparkly outfits? Even though we know it's not true. At least for a short bit?
Because the fancy is in trouble, from both people and issues within and outside of it.
My thoughts?
I don't care what a handler wears, so long as it's not hindering the handling or presentation of the dog.
If anything, she was probably more relatable to the general public watching the show than those who were dressed up. And the fancy kinda needs more of that.
I get that it's a big, prestigious, and hell, even glamorous show. And I'm not saying the fancy should do away with that. But at the same time.....maybe there should be a little thought put into how being so fancy as a fancy may make it seem that the sport is only for the well-off who have money to spare for sparkly outfits? Even though we know it's not true. At least for a short bit?
Because the fancy is in trouble, from both people and issues within and outside of it.
Wednesday, February 11, 2015
If You Really Love The Breed You Own....
In the same theme as yesterday's post, people suggesting people get a particular breed because they own one.
I get it. You love your chosen breed. You've had great experiences with them, they're a good match for you. However....
Not everyone is.
Just as not everyone is suitable to take on a random rescue dog, not everyone will be a good match for your breed. But I see it time and time again. People, the general public, suggesting people get their own breed because....
They're wonderful.
They're great with kids.
They're fun.
They're mellow.
They're sweet.
They're loyal.
They're smart.
And so on.....
And they do truly believe their breeds are that. Their own dogs have probably been that to them. I'm NOT denying that.
What I am denying is that any given breed is suitable for any given person. It's simply not true. EVERY breed has their pros and cons. EVERY SINGLE BREED. That is NOT a bad thing. If anything, it makes dogs in all their different breeds, that much more interesting in their diversity.
You should absolutely take pride in the differences, the challenges, the quirks, the traits that make your breed that breed. And if you REALLY care about your breed, you'll stop trying to shove them down everyone's throat.
Yes, they're great. They're particularly great for you! That's awesome!
However, not everyone can deal with a Lab's energy, especially when they're young. Most Labradors get dumped within the first 2 years because they are slow to mature and can be more than just a handful. That's one of their downsides, it takes a few years for them to mellow out. Let me ask you, if you are a Lab person.....
Do you LIKE the fact that so many Labradors get dumped?
The answer, if you really care about Labrador Retrievers, should be "No". You should not want to see this breed in shelters or rescues at all. So why do you recommend them to anyone and everyone? Because you want to share your awesome breed? Then share them with the right people. Be honest. If you see someone who isn't very active, don't encourage them to get a Lab. Tell them the downsides to the breed, why the breed probably is probably a bad fit. Encourage them to make an educated and informed choice, encourage research into other breeds that are more suitable for their lifestyle.
The same goes for any breed.
And please, please, please, do not try to push a breed that is totally opposite of what a person is looking for onto them.
Furthermore, I also feel that with the general public's suggestions with breeds, is out of hand. You see the same common breeds being suggested over and over and over. I don't hate popular breeds, but I do hate popularity for what it does to a breed. Encouraging that popularity of already popular breeds to continue to grow is BAD for those breeds. Willy nilly interest is bad for any breed.
If you're going to be one of those people who gives recommendations, please.....research and learn breeds yourself. You don't need to know all the ins and outs of all of the breeds, but having a good general idea of breeds they may want to check into, especially outside of the common breeds, DOES make an impact of "Wow, I've never heard of that breed before" and sometimes encourages further research. And who knows, their perfect match might just be a breed that needs a little bit of a boost.
It's no secret that I love rare breeds and want to see them stick around long after I'm gone. I also want to encourage people to look at the dog world as a whole, see it as vast and amazing as I do, and encourage people to research instead of just diving into the first breed they get told they should get. I want to see a world where most people research breeds they're interested in more so than they do appliances, cars, and computers. I want to see a world where impulse buying of pets is not the main thing that happens (because there will always be odd things that happen, the oops litters, shelter dogs-yes I consider that buying, experienced people looking for a dog suddenly and a breeder may have had a buyer or 3 back out, etc).
I get it. You love your chosen breed. You've had great experiences with them, they're a good match for you. However....
Not everyone is.
Just as not everyone is suitable to take on a random rescue dog, not everyone will be a good match for your breed. But I see it time and time again. People, the general public, suggesting people get their own breed because....
They're wonderful.
They're great with kids.
They're fun.
They're mellow.
They're sweet.
They're loyal.
They're smart.
And so on.....
And they do truly believe their breeds are that. Their own dogs have probably been that to them. I'm NOT denying that.
What I am denying is that any given breed is suitable for any given person. It's simply not true. EVERY breed has their pros and cons. EVERY SINGLE BREED. That is NOT a bad thing. If anything, it makes dogs in all their different breeds, that much more interesting in their diversity.
You should absolutely take pride in the differences, the challenges, the quirks, the traits that make your breed that breed. And if you REALLY care about your breed, you'll stop trying to shove them down everyone's throat.
Yes, they're great. They're particularly great for you! That's awesome!
However, not everyone can deal with a Lab's energy, especially when they're young. Most Labradors get dumped within the first 2 years because they are slow to mature and can be more than just a handful. That's one of their downsides, it takes a few years for them to mellow out. Let me ask you, if you are a Lab person.....
Do you LIKE the fact that so many Labradors get dumped?
The answer, if you really care about Labrador Retrievers, should be "No". You should not want to see this breed in shelters or rescues at all. So why do you recommend them to anyone and everyone? Because you want to share your awesome breed? Then share them with the right people. Be honest. If you see someone who isn't very active, don't encourage them to get a Lab. Tell them the downsides to the breed, why the breed probably is probably a bad fit. Encourage them to make an educated and informed choice, encourage research into other breeds that are more suitable for their lifestyle.
The same goes for any breed.
And please, please, please, do not try to push a breed that is totally opposite of what a person is looking for onto them.
Furthermore, I also feel that with the general public's suggestions with breeds, is out of hand. You see the same common breeds being suggested over and over and over. I don't hate popular breeds, but I do hate popularity for what it does to a breed. Encouraging that popularity of already popular breeds to continue to grow is BAD for those breeds. Willy nilly interest is bad for any breed.
If you're going to be one of those people who gives recommendations, please.....research and learn breeds yourself. You don't need to know all the ins and outs of all of the breeds, but having a good general idea of breeds they may want to check into, especially outside of the common breeds, DOES make an impact of "Wow, I've never heard of that breed before" and sometimes encourages further research. And who knows, their perfect match might just be a breed that needs a little bit of a boost.
It's no secret that I love rare breeds and want to see them stick around long after I'm gone. I also want to encourage people to look at the dog world as a whole, see it as vast and amazing as I do, and encourage people to research instead of just diving into the first breed they get told they should get. I want to see a world where most people research breeds they're interested in more so than they do appliances, cars, and computers. I want to see a world where impulse buying of pets is not the main thing that happens (because there will always be odd things that happen, the oops litters, shelter dogs-yes I consider that buying, experienced people looking for a dog suddenly and a breeder may have had a buyer or 3 back out, etc).
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
It Is NOT "Cool" To Pressure Or Guilt-People Who Ignore Other's Reasons, Wants, And Needs
Over the years, I have seen an increasing number of people suggesting people adopt. Go to a shelter, go to a rescue, save a life! A noble cause, truly.
But there is a point where it becomes pressuring, guilt-tripping, and in some cases, down right bullying.
"I want a dog that is good with kids."
"Go to the shelter, take your kids, adopt!"
"I want a dog that is good with cats."
"Go to a rescue, adopt!"
"I want a dog that I can do agility with."
"Shelter, rescue, adopt!"
"I want a dog that is mellow."
"Adopt!"
"I want a dog that won't eat my chickens."
"Adopt!"
Because you know, shelters test dogs regularly for compatibility with livestock. -.-
Because you know, shelters aren't high-stress environments.
Because you know, no one ever returns a dog they've adopted because behaviors have emerged that no one had a clue about.
Fact is, rescues dogs aren't always a guaranteed option.
Shelters and rescues ARE high-stress environments, even at the best of times. Dogs can shut down while they're there. Or! Dogs can become overly anxious and hyper due to lack of stimulation, wrong stimulation, lack of exercise, or just plain stress. They're strictly controlled, yet stressful, environments that are so vastly different from home life that you can't see the dog for what it really is. A kennel isn't going to have drywall that can be chewed through, or couches that the dog can destroy.
Even when shelter and worker volunteers go above and beyond the basics, there is still only so much they can see. Only so much that they notice. Only so much that any given dog will give to them.
It's not a bad thing-it's a complicated thing. It's the reason why I believe that a large number of rescue dogs are best off in hands that have at least some dog experience, flexibility, and the ability to resort to various resources if needed.
Dogs that are still rescues, but have been in foster homes are a step up. Still, there can be quirks that aren't seen depending on how that household runs, which could be very unlike the one the dog ends up in. Plus, the foster home may have very old, quiet cats, and the adopting one may have very active cats that set off prey drive. There may very well be incompatibility.
Where cat-testing is a thing in some shelters and rescues, not all do it. Different animals smell differently, move differently, act differently. There's no guarantee that a cat-safe dog will be fine with rabbits, ferrets, birds, etc. Hell, there's no guarantee that a 'cat'-safe dog will even be fine with kittens because kittens move and smell differently than adult cats (and this is something I've had experience with, not through a rescue dog, but a roommate's dog-fine with adults, not safe with kittens).
And if someone is looking for a dog to be around livestock at the shelter? Oh boy, that's a HUGE gamble. Even if you do find a herding or livestock guardian in the shelter, there are those who just have the wrong drive and are there because they ARE a risk to livestock and got dumped for it. You don't know.
You also don't know what a shelter dog's health is going to be like. No, mixed breeds aren't healthier, they have their own set of common problems and can pop up with uncommon ones just the same. If anything, the early-fixed pups are at a high risk of ACL tears, which makes agility a risk. Not every dog, mixed or not, will have health issues, even when they've had things stacked against them. But it is what it is, which is a question mark with a dog whose history is unknown.
I would love if we could really just magically pull all of a dog's quirks and traits and health out of the air so they could be placed perfectly. I wish we could have that guarantee, but we don't. Sometimes adoptions and trials don't work out. That's ok. Not every and any dog is for anybody who comes along, that is important to note.
So here's the deal. Here is where I have serious issues with a number of pro-adoption/rescue people...
You push. No matter what reasons the original person who was asking for help says, you push. You shove. And sometimes, when they stand firm, insults start getting thrown about. Accusations of them "killing dogs" by going to a breeder. By knowing what they want and are looking for.
Not all dogs are the same. They're dogs, then they're their breeds/mix, then they're individuals. If you expect someone who is wanting a Pug, has researched Pugs for the past year, to go to a shelter and be happy with some random Catahoula mix.....you're risking setting them and whatever dog you have guilt tripped them into getting into failing. That's not nice. It's not responsible or fair or right.
If you tell someone who is looking into a livestock guard to watch their flocks to go to a shelter and adopt whatever, you are RISKING THEIR LIVESTOCK. You! You are risking the death of animals on an unknown because they should save a life. What happens when that saved life takes other lives?
If you bully them into feeling so bad about even thinking about going to a responsible breeder they've been referred to, that they end up adopting a high energy, anxiety ridden dog who eats their walls and doors in the short time they've gone to get the mail...you should be paying for repairs and apologizing.
Because people who want predictability of a certain breed and a good match because they know they can't handle anything that gets thrown at them aren't bad people. If anything, they're more responsible and aware than the people who try to shove the adoption agenda down their throats. It's okay if their wants, needs, and reasons are different than yours.
And before you set off on the "you can find purebreds in rescues!"......Let me fix that for you. "You can find questionable quality purebreds of the COMMON breeds in rescues and shelters". Many of the rarer breeds...not even the national breed club rescues will pull many of them in a year. That's what happens when there's only double digits of a breed registered each year, or even just triple. Most breeds do NOT have the numbers behind them that Labs, Goldens, German Shepherds, or any of the other top 20 or so breeds do.
It IS ok to ask them how they feel about rescue, if they're interested in adopting. It's horribly annoying to be the 28th person telling them to adopt. It's awful to be that person who insists on adoption at all costs, trying to think of ways and reasons for them to do it when they have stated they're not interested or that they're looking for particular things. You, at that point, are pushing.
Peer pressure isn't cool. Remember your parents telling you about peer pressure in regards to sex and drugs? Yeah. Pressuring people is bad, Mmmmkay? Guilt-tripping is bad. Bullying is bad.
Know what is awesome though? Being a helpful person. Being insightful. Being respectful. Because I'll tell you a secret.....I get a lot of people thanking me when I'm giving them spiffy information and options they never would have thought of otherwise. So let's help each other while respecting each other choices.
But there is a point where it becomes pressuring, guilt-tripping, and in some cases, down right bullying.
"I want a dog that is good with kids."
"Go to the shelter, take your kids, adopt!"
"I want a dog that is good with cats."
"Go to a rescue, adopt!"
"I want a dog that I can do agility with."
"Shelter, rescue, adopt!"
"I want a dog that is mellow."
"Adopt!"
"I want a dog that won't eat my chickens."
"Adopt!"
Because you know, shelters test dogs regularly for compatibility with livestock. -.-
Because you know, shelters aren't high-stress environments.
Because you know, no one ever returns a dog they've adopted because behaviors have emerged that no one had a clue about.
Fact is, rescues dogs aren't always a guaranteed option.
Shelters and rescues ARE high-stress environments, even at the best of times. Dogs can shut down while they're there. Or! Dogs can become overly anxious and hyper due to lack of stimulation, wrong stimulation, lack of exercise, or just plain stress. They're strictly controlled, yet stressful, environments that are so vastly different from home life that you can't see the dog for what it really is. A kennel isn't going to have drywall that can be chewed through, or couches that the dog can destroy.
Even when shelter and worker volunteers go above and beyond the basics, there is still only so much they can see. Only so much that they notice. Only so much that any given dog will give to them.
It's not a bad thing-it's a complicated thing. It's the reason why I believe that a large number of rescue dogs are best off in hands that have at least some dog experience, flexibility, and the ability to resort to various resources if needed.
Dogs that are still rescues, but have been in foster homes are a step up. Still, there can be quirks that aren't seen depending on how that household runs, which could be very unlike the one the dog ends up in. Plus, the foster home may have very old, quiet cats, and the adopting one may have very active cats that set off prey drive. There may very well be incompatibility.
Where cat-testing is a thing in some shelters and rescues, not all do it. Different animals smell differently, move differently, act differently. There's no guarantee that a cat-safe dog will be fine with rabbits, ferrets, birds, etc. Hell, there's no guarantee that a 'cat'-safe dog will even be fine with kittens because kittens move and smell differently than adult cats (and this is something I've had experience with, not through a rescue dog, but a roommate's dog-fine with adults, not safe with kittens).
And if someone is looking for a dog to be around livestock at the shelter? Oh boy, that's a HUGE gamble. Even if you do find a herding or livestock guardian in the shelter, there are those who just have the wrong drive and are there because they ARE a risk to livestock and got dumped for it. You don't know.
You also don't know what a shelter dog's health is going to be like. No, mixed breeds aren't healthier, they have their own set of common problems and can pop up with uncommon ones just the same. If anything, the early-fixed pups are at a high risk of ACL tears, which makes agility a risk. Not every dog, mixed or not, will have health issues, even when they've had things stacked against them. But it is what it is, which is a question mark with a dog whose history is unknown.
I would love if we could really just magically pull all of a dog's quirks and traits and health out of the air so they could be placed perfectly. I wish we could have that guarantee, but we don't. Sometimes adoptions and trials don't work out. That's ok. Not every and any dog is for anybody who comes along, that is important to note.
So here's the deal. Here is where I have serious issues with a number of pro-adoption/rescue people...
You push. No matter what reasons the original person who was asking for help says, you push. You shove. And sometimes, when they stand firm, insults start getting thrown about. Accusations of them "killing dogs" by going to a breeder. By knowing what they want and are looking for.
Not all dogs are the same. They're dogs, then they're their breeds/mix, then they're individuals. If you expect someone who is wanting a Pug, has researched Pugs for the past year, to go to a shelter and be happy with some random Catahoula mix.....you're risking setting them and whatever dog you have guilt tripped them into getting into failing. That's not nice. It's not responsible or fair or right.
If you tell someone who is looking into a livestock guard to watch their flocks to go to a shelter and adopt whatever, you are RISKING THEIR LIVESTOCK. You! You are risking the death of animals on an unknown because they should save a life. What happens when that saved life takes other lives?
If you bully them into feeling so bad about even thinking about going to a responsible breeder they've been referred to, that they end up adopting a high energy, anxiety ridden dog who eats their walls and doors in the short time they've gone to get the mail...you should be paying for repairs and apologizing.
Because people who want predictability of a certain breed and a good match because they know they can't handle anything that gets thrown at them aren't bad people. If anything, they're more responsible and aware than the people who try to shove the adoption agenda down their throats. It's okay if their wants, needs, and reasons are different than yours.
And before you set off on the "you can find purebreds in rescues!"......Let me fix that for you. "You can find questionable quality purebreds of the COMMON breeds in rescues and shelters". Many of the rarer breeds...not even the national breed club rescues will pull many of them in a year. That's what happens when there's only double digits of a breed registered each year, or even just triple. Most breeds do NOT have the numbers behind them that Labs, Goldens, German Shepherds, or any of the other top 20 or so breeds do.
It IS ok to ask them how they feel about rescue, if they're interested in adopting. It's horribly annoying to be the 28th person telling them to adopt. It's awful to be that person who insists on adoption at all costs, trying to think of ways and reasons for them to do it when they have stated they're not interested or that they're looking for particular things. You, at that point, are pushing.
Peer pressure isn't cool. Remember your parents telling you about peer pressure in regards to sex and drugs? Yeah. Pressuring people is bad, Mmmmkay? Guilt-tripping is bad. Bullying is bad.
Know what is awesome though? Being a helpful person. Being insightful. Being respectful. Because I'll tell you a secret.....I get a lot of people thanking me when I'm giving them spiffy information and options they never would have thought of otherwise. So let's help each other while respecting each other choices.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)