Open Studbooks

[OwnedByBCs]

Lyzelle, you are still very correct that conformation is almost entirely political. LOL! Like, this weekend, the judge put up a lovely working line bitch for Best of Winners, and then for breed she put up one of the most overdone fluffy show bred BCs I've ever seen for Best of Breed- but he was on a pro handler. My guess is that she was willing to put up a working type dog for the classes, where there are no handlers, knowing that she was more correct than the show type dogs she was competing against- but when it came to the Champions, she saw some familiar faces and then it got political.

There is one judge who will put up a class dog for best of breed and group wins almost every time she judges- and she always puts up working type dogs. However, the problem is, she seems to want to put up the most "odd" dog in the ring- the most skinny, the one with the longest legs, the most "stereotypical" working bred BC. Sometimes, overlooking structure and temperament to do so. It doesn't even matter what a judge puts up, it could be something that is favorable or not, but politics have so much to do with the show ring and what is rewarded in it.

 

[Psyfalcon]

Most dogs that have been ancient bloodlines were geographically isolated. I don't see much point in trying to keep an aboriginal dog pure in the US where we've imported a total of 100 dogs.

We do need to move past breeds for certain types, such as the working retrievers. Say you have a nice Lab. Your choice now, even among retriever people seems to be buy semen from a popular Lab. That Lab that you've never seen work, never handled, and certainly never saw how it was trained to not rip your ducks apart. Meanwhile, your club has a number of good Goldens and Chesapeakes that you've seen worked and trained in the conditions you hunt in....

It would be nice to keep all the historical oddities, but dogs can't just be kept in a museum, free of problems from inbreeding or even changing breed standards within the closed registry system.

 

[Romy]

Most dogs that have been ancient bloodlines were geographically isolated. I don't see much point in trying to keep an aboriginal dog pure in the US where we've imported a total of 100 dogs.

The thing is, in this world dogs aren't isolated by virtue of being on one continent or another anymore. Actually, the azawakh studbook is open as American and European breeders regularly travel to the Sahel to bring in fresh blood, but it's not outside blood if that makes sense. Looking at people's pedigrees, some of the lines being worked with are only 1-2 generations out of living with nomads in the desert, hunting and guarding cattle for subsistence survival. They aren't outcrossed to saluki or sloughi or anything like that. Breeders on both continents exchange dogs and breedings relatively openly and frequently.

I think some of these genetic oddities are very important to preserve, just like some of the more modern breeds are very important to continue to develop.

 

[OwnedByBCs]

The thing is, in this world dogs aren't isolated by virtue of being on one continent or another anymore. Actually, the azawakh studbook is open as American and European breeders regularly travel to the Sahel to bring in fresh blood, but it's not outside blood if that makes sense. Looking at people's pedigrees, some of the lines being worked with are only 1-2 generations out of living with nomads in the desert, hunting and guarding cattle for subsistence survival. They aren't outcrossed to saluki or sloughi or anything like that. Breeders on both continents exchange dogs and breedings relatively openly and frequently.

I think some of these genetic oddities are very important to preserve, just like some of the more modern breeds are very important to continue to develop.

I agree.

 

[Dekka]

I would like to see registration work more like it does with JRTs, or with the warmbloods.

Just being purebred isn't enough for breeding. And if you have a spectacular animal outside the breed that has all the characteristics you want in your breed then it can come it.

I don't think they should be opened liberally in the way that it would let breeders toss what ever they want in. But if those puppies (as young adults or adults) then had to be inspected along with others of the breed then it would be less of a concern. There need to be checks and balances in place or a lot of the good would be lost with the bad.

Kaiden's mom was an unregistered JRT (with the pedigree, so its not like we didn't know who she was) but that was ok when it came to registering Kaiden, it just cost more.

 

[Keechak]

Aussies had an open studbook as recent as 2001. And it is within our club's bylaws to open it again at any time for any reason. Kechara's litter was an open studbook litter, her mother wasn't registered but her father was so her litter was given a special registration number to signify they were a first generation studbook outcross. Her mother had to pass a simple "does she look like an Aussie?" test for the litter to be considered.

 

[BlackPuppy]

As far as studbooks being opened, I think it has to be done carefully. Not saying it shouldn't be done, but it should be done under close supervision, thorough record keeping and intense screening.

Excellent!

The Dutch Shepherd breed in Europe has open studbooks in some countries, most specifically Belgium and France. But those countries are very relaxed about the dogs it admits. The Dutch breed club had a meeting this year with those countries to try to tighten up their entry policies to admit dogs that actually look something like a Dutch Shepherd.

The working dog people with Dutch/Malinois dogs want to get their dogs FCI registered and generally go to Belgium to get into the open studbook. Even some American breeders are sending their D/M dogs to Europe just to get papers.

It's good to add new blood, but it needs to be done carefully. In the history book on Dutch Shepherds, there was a period in the early 20th century when German Shepherds were introduced to increase the gene pool. However, it took many generations to remove the undesirable GSD traits from the breed and they will never allow that again. DS should not look like GSD or a Malinois. If you ever saw a true yellow DS, you would not think it's a Malinois. You'd think it was some mixed breed.

 

[BlackPuppy]

Most dogs that have been ancient bloodlines were geographically isolated. I don't see much point in trying to keep an aboriginal dog pure in the US where we've imported a total of 100 dogs.

I don't see any reason why you can't. It's so easy to import dogs from other countries. And for some rare breeds, it's cheaper to import than to buy an American born pup.

 

[BlackPuppy]

I feel like registration (particularly for working dogs) is really lacking. While a few breeds/types have their own personal registration/working avenue, not all do and therefore lean heavily on the larger Kennel Clubs, such as the AKC, UKC, etc. As we all know, they don't really regulate things all that well. Anyone can breed, DNA tests aren't required, just about anything can be fibbed, there's no incentives for good breeders vs. bad breeders, and no way to truly track and record anything ranging from pedigree records, health testing, ownership/handler records, NOTHING. It's mostly a fancy looking piece of paper. That's what registration comes down to.

Unfortunately, the American breed clubs don't have the power that the breed clubs in Europe have. The Dutch Dutch Shepherd club can reject your breeding plans. They don't allow repeat breeding, except for certain exception, and no dog can have more than 4 litters.

Breeders must follow their rules or the puppies aren't registered. Possibly other penalties, I'm not sure. They also set the price of puppies, so that people don't use it as a money making enterprise. And many people breed the family dog because it's expected to do so to diversify the gene pool.

Just think what that would do to our puppy mills in the States!

 

[BlackPuppy]

That all sounds good to me. The KNPV dutch shepherd registry has (or at least it did have) an open studbook and their dogs are known to be pretty great.

KNPV is not a registry for Dutch Shepherds but for Police dogs of any breed. The great thing about the KNPV is that they don't hide pedigrees. If the dog is mixed with German Shepherd and Belgian Malinois, it is right there in black and white.

 

[Pops2]

Unfortunately, the American breed clubs don't have the power that the breed clubs in Europe have. The Dutch Dutch Shepherd club can reject your breeding plans. They don't allow repeat breeding, except for certain exception, and no dog can have more than 4 litters.

i'm going to disagree w/ this because it goes back to NOT everyone wants their dogs to work in EXACTLY the same way and it thus limits the breeding of exceptionally good dogs that work different from the norm. it may also inhibit the use of a great producer which is only a mediocre working dog.

Breeders must follow their rules or the puppies aren't registered. Possibly other penalties, I'm not sure. They also set the price of puppies, so that people don't use it as a money making enterprise. And many people breed the family dog because it's expected to do so to diversify the gene pool.

Just think what that would do to our puppy mills in the States!

the problem in the States is that IF you could get the major registries on board, the junk breeders would just start a new registry (kind of like they have already done). and since i (& many Americans) want the government involved in my personal decisions as little as possible government regulation or backing of the major registries would be MOST unwelcome.seriously name one government program or agency that doesn't have serious flaws that undermine the original intent of the program.

 

[Bahamutt99]

The UKC recently closed the single-registry for the APBT, and I don't think it has the strongest gene pool to begin with. It makes me unhappy in that my most favorite dogs are usually not UKC-registered, although they are still registered, purebred APBTs. So in a sense, I support the opening of stud books. I would not want to necessarily introduce additional breeds to my own, but there are other populations of these dogs which we should be allowed to bring in. Whether you agree with it or not, there are even APBTs being used in their historic occupation legally in other countries, and those dogs could have something to add, whether they're papered or not.

I love purebred dogs, but it's all just a concept created by mankind anyway. Open the dang stud books. Maybe we can make our masterpieces even better. No sense in continually dipping your brush in the same jar of paint until it runs dry.

 

[JustaLilBitaLuck]

This isn't something I know very much about, but...

I think that studbooks should be opened, as long as the dog is deemed to be representative of the breed. If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck, and passes tests deeming it to be a healthy duck. I don't think there's any harm in widening the gene pool a little, and bringing some new blood in.

 

[misfitz]

Testing working ability is all well and good for working dogs, but what about pet breeds? How would you judge, say, a Pekinese or a Pomeranian? On it's lap-sitting ability?

I voted for going back to landraces, BTW. That's how breeds originally started before the whole kennel club/registry thing was invented. I saw an interesting article about Salukis recently that seems pertinent to this discussion:

http://cynoanarchist.wordpress.com/2012/09/18/considering-odd-colors-in-salukis/

 

[Pops2]

Testing working ability is all well and good for working dogs, but what about pet breeds? How would you judge, say, a Pekinese or a Pomeranian? On it's lap-sitting ability?

I voted for going back to landraces, BTW. That's how breeds originally started before the whole kennel club/registry thing was invented. I saw an interesting article about Salukis recently that seems pertinent to this discussion:

http://cynoanarchist.wordpress.com/2012/09/18/considering-odd-colors-in-salukis/

CGC minimum requirement. unfortunately A LOT wouldn't pass.

 

[Aleron]

That all sounds good to me. The KNPV dutch shepherd registry has (or at least it did have) an open studbook and their dogs are known to be pretty great.

Yet Roust's mother was a KNPV Mal and has a less than stellar temperament and his sire is AKC and is sound. Having an open studbook in that way is no different than a closed studbook, you will end up with some great dogs, some so-so dogs and some not so good dogs.

Also an issue with the KNPV dogs, is they can be great for what they are being bred for and that's fine and good. But they aren't really great for helping to preserve the breeds involved. The KNPV Mals aren't really Mals, the GSDs aren't really GSDs, the Dutchies aren't really Dutchies. They are sort of their own entity in that way. I'm not knocking them or saying it's bad or wrong for people to breed them, it's just that such breeding is creating a type rather than preserving a breed...if that makes sense.

It's good to add new blood, but it needs to be done carefully. In the history book on Dutch Shepherds, there was a period in the early 20th century when German Shepherds were introduced to increase the gene pool. However, it took many generations to remove the undesirable GSD traits from the breed and they will never allow that again. DS should not look like GSD or a Malinois. If you ever saw a true yellow DS, you would not think it's a Malinois. You'd think it was some mixed breed.

Interestingly, there is a high risk of HD in Mals. I suspect this is a side effect of GSD (and Dutch? Are they higher risk for HD?) being in some lines. So that is another consideration with outcrossing to different breeds. Belgians have a higher than average risk for seizures but lower than average risk for HD. Outcrossing to another breed to reduce the risk of epilepsy may sound good but you need would to be careful you aren't accidentally bringing in things which are not currently an issue. Trading one problem for another or for the unknown.

I also believe that dogs SHOULD be regulated as breeding animals, and in working dogs I do NOT believe this should be an issue. Unlike conformation, you can't get political when it comes to a working dog. It either gets the job done, or it doesn't.

Oh my. Everything you can compete in with dogs involves politics. Everything.

Lyzelle, you are still very correct that conformation is almost entirely political. LOL! Like, this weekend, the judge put up a lovely working line bitch for Best of Winners, and then for breed she put up one of the most overdone fluffy show bred BCs I've ever seen for Best of Breed- but he was on a pro handler. My guess is that she was willing to put up a working type dog for the classes, where there are no handlers, knowing that she was more correct than the show type dogs she was competing against- but when it came to the Champions, she saw some familiar faces and then it got political.

There is one judge who will put up a class dog for best of breed and group wins almost every time she judges- and she always puts up working type dogs. However, the problem is, she seems to want to put up the most "odd" dog in the ring- the most skinny, the one with the longest legs, the most "stereotypical" working bred BC. Sometimes, overlooking structure and temperament to do so. It doesn't even matter what a judge puts up, it could be something that is favorable or not, but politics have so much to do with the show ring and what is rewarded in it.

None of the things mentioned here are necessarily proof of politics in the ring. Conformation judging is always subjective and sometimes political. Some of it depends on the breed too. And there is a big difference between classes and specials.

I said I'd support opening the stud book when there is a need. One can certainly choose to "liberally breed" dogs in their own breeding programs and just go without registration or go with registries that will allow what you are doing. In some of the lower number breeds, I'd hate to see a open registry with no string attached unless it was pretty difficult to get a dog registered on merit. It would be easy for the "not really X breed but registered as such" to out number the actual dogs of the breed, which could end up creating a whole different breed.

I don't think there is a straight forward answer to these questions or really an answer that will fit all breeds. I would like to see something between an AKC ILP and AKC full registration available for dogs who appear to be purebred but have no pedigrees or "questionable" pedigrees. Something a long the lines of AKC's Conditional Registration, where after 3 generations of known breeding you can start having full registration again. 3 generations is actually a decent commitment to breed and maintain dogs who can't be fully registered. And there could possibly be certain criteria which must be met which could weed out people who aren't committed. And I think the selection process for that would need to be more involved than the ILP too.

 

[YodelDogs]

The AKC has opened the stud book twice for Basenjis at the request of the Basenji Club of America. The requirements to get a dog included are very strict and many dogs have been imported from Africa are denied acceptance. All Basenjis originated in Africa but this certainly doesn't mean that all dogs in Africa are Basenjis. Village dogs with a similar body type to Basenjis are found everywhere but just because it "walks like a duck", does not mean that it *is* a duck. The basic pariah build is dominant and while a village dog may resemble a Basenji, it won't necessarily produce like one. Recessives like long hair and floppy ears or unwanted traits like barking or twice a year seasons will come out sooner or later. The Basenji breed has a small gene pool. The addition of new dogs will only be beneficial if the animals will breed true. As long as requirements are kept high, I personally would keep the stud book open indefinately.