opinions on breeding working dogs

[mrose_s]

Just been doing a bit more reading.

Say you had a mixed breed that you used for herding. This dog is a mix but it is the best worker you've ever seen. The oppurtunity comes up to breed it to keep a couple of pups for yourself to train to continue working, plus others have seen your dog work and would be interested in pups.
Would you condone breeding this dog? Despite it not "bettering a breed"?

I personally would imagine it acceptable as long as the other parent was of equal working ability and neither had any major health issues. So long as the pups would be used to work, not just to compete in trials or sports. But I'm looking for opinions on this situation more than anything.

 

[Dekka]

I think, as you describe it, its a good thing. But then again I truly believe closed stud books and breeding for the conformation ring, will eventually ruin any breed (viable pop and such)

 

[mrose_s]

the show ring frightens me really, i think it has mutilated some great breeds and once the coolie finds their way in, their popularity will go through the roof and we'll have double merle deaf/blind puppies popping up in backyards everywhere.

sorry, thats kinda off topic but I've been doing a lot of coolie reading tonight lol. finding a breeder is hard because there is no standard etc. thats what brought this thread on

 

[Dekka]

Are they working to have them included. The JRT is not in many KC cause we have fought to keep them out. (that is why there is now the PRT) The BC just got back in to the Canadian KC against many BC breeders. But they will still remain with their own registry. So there will be the 'Barbie' Collies (show ring dogs) and the border collies (working type dogs)

 

[mrose_s]

That interesting. I'm still workign out about coolies, I found a coolie forum but I can't join because they don't accept my email address which is annoying, so i'm doing the lurker thing reading as much as I can. seems like the general concensus so far is to get them recognised but for a breed that is most well known for their merle colouring I believe that will spell disaster.

 

[HoundedByHounds]

I think it's fine as long as one knows that since the parents of the herding wonder are unknown, that talent may not come thru at all in the pups...such is genetics. Ditto hip eye or knees problems...parents aren't known...if she's not affected only carrying, you wouldn't know...

You increase your odds taking her to a known stud with known lines whatever they are, that is prepotent for herding. Again...same principles apply whether breeding for work to conformation. Herding is even more complicated a thing than say earset from a genetic standpoint so you have to be even more diligent not to lose it.

No reason not to do it...just more reasons to be prepared for it not to work and have pet homes for the potential pups.

 

[MaryAndDobes]

Say you had a mixed breed that you used for herding. This dog is a mix but it is the best worker you've ever seen.

I guess "you've ever seen" is rather subjective. How many have you seen? Do you know what I mean? A lot of people use that as an excuse to breed not only mixed breeds but purebreds as well. Well, it's the "best (fill in the blank) I've ever seen!" And if generic you has only seen a couple, is that a meaningful reason to breed?

The oppurtunity comes up to breed it to keep a couple of pups for yourself to train to continue working, plus others have seen your dog work and would be interested in pups.
Would you condone breeding this dog? Despite it not "bettering a breed"?

It doesn't really matter if I condone it as it happens all the time.

However, there's a saying in hunting dogs which I think applies here: Life is too short to hunt with an ugly dog. It just kind of sums up what I think about breeding and that is that it's all important - looks, working ability, health, temperament, longevity, etc. Why focus on just one thing? Breeding shouldn't just focus on one thing.

I personally would imagine it acceptable as long as the other parent was of equal working ability and neither had any major health issues.

How would you know what each of them carried for major health issues? How much checking into the background of mixed breed dogs can one do? Usually not much, if any. Therefore, you rarely have any idea if their parents and ancestors had hip issues, elbow issues, liver problems, kidney disease, eye disorders, cardiac defects, etc. And when one is breeding mixed breed dogs, really how does one know that the one they are breeding to isn't the bitch's brother, sire, uncle, grandsire, nephew, cousin, etc? In this zest to create what they might call non inbred puppies, how do they really even know this is what they are doing? With no pedigrees and no ancestry to check into, severe inbreeding can be taking place in complete ignorance.

 

[mrose_s]

i see your point MandD.

I never considered having unknown parentage, still learning see? lol

 

[malndobe]

First, mix doesn't neccessarily equal unknown parentage. The vast majority of KNPV dogs imported into this country for use as police dogs are mix breeds. But they have pedigrees that are many generations long. Here's just one example, a very well known "Dutch Shepherd" named Rudie Pegge, who you can see from the pedigree is not a purebred DS, but his pedigree can be traced back a lot further then just what is on this website.

http://www.users.bigpond.com/kampk9/Rudieped.htm

Anyway, if this dog was truly spectactular, passed all the basic health tests, there were homes lined up for the pups (not just people who said "sure I'd take one, but people who are seriously committed to taking one), and a mate that appears compatible can be found then I don't see a problem with breeding the dog. But you would have to be prepared for the possibility that the pups aren't going to have their parents talent. Then what are your backup plans for the litter?