Having watched this program when it aired I think the main point of
it was that we have as show breeders gone from breeding dogs for
function first and form second to form first in the eye of the
beholder. A beholder that at times has absolutely no idea about what
is needed for the dog to be able to do the job that it was originally
bred for.

The alsations were a prime example, here is a strong working dog used
by police forces around the globe and yet look at the mess the show
breeders have done to the breed... dogs which are basically cripples
in the back end and yet in the ring this is what is sought after,
prized and awarded, new people coming into the breed don't know any
difference and so are making the problem worse. It was a good
example because when you look at the remaining working dogs, which
are reducing so drastically that our police force have had to look
elsewhere for new stock, they do not resemble the dogs in the ring,
the dogs in the ring could not do the job that is required of them.
In that area as breeders and enthusiasts WE have failed, we have
failed to protect a breed, we have breed but not for the good of the
breed.

Can the same be said of the Weimaraner??? We have a Blue that
doesn't exist other than from American stock outside the odd incident
which is said to have been a cross breed anyway, this is OUR easy to
point at error. Health aside, the breeding of that dog into the gene
pool was not for the benefit longterm of the breed but the
consequence can be seen far and wide with exported studs.

Health well our breed is no angel and neither are all of our breeders
we over breed on popular studs, finding out information on health can
be like pulling teeth or blood from a stone and the majority of our
dogs are derived from show wins rather than field work so the
possibility of failing our breed from breeding for purpose and
function to breeding to the eye of the beholder.

When is winning more important than the future of the breed???? And
at what cost??

The program has given us an opportunity to take a very close look at
our breeds, to reassess our breeding best practises and to question
our own ethics with regard to our own lines. A chance to be honest
about the problems we have and how to correct them.

No one likes to admit they have a problem and you can't stop people
from breeding from your stock once they leave your home, certainly
not in the UK but maybe its a good thing this program was aired. It
was one sided and made the KC look a twit but it wont be the only
governing body that has that title.




--- In weimaraner@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Ede" <mikeede@...> wrote:
>
> Karen,
> The fall out from close line breeding isn't only bringing
out "hidden"
> genetic defects, inbreeding depression caused by a lack of genetic
> variety is quiet possibly a bigger killer than the individual
diseases
> themselves for example lack of resistance to disease, reproductive
> problems, immune system problems, etc. When you look at the breed
now
> and compare it to 25 years ago do you genuinely think it is
healthier in
> terms of tolerance of food (allergies to certain protein sources,
IBD
> etc.), reactions to vaccinations etc.? (genuinely curious as to your
> impression)
>
> Mutts may very well have a greater variety of illness than
individual
> "pure" breeds but the rate of incidence is much lower, over use of
> popular sires and a limited number of sires being used in each
> generation pretty much guarantees that the genetic variety of each
breed
> decreases with each generation. Look at Dalmatians and the incidence
> rate for uric acid calculi and urinary blockages caused by these
stones
> to see how quickly a breed can paint itself into a corner.
>
> You are completely correct when you are state that "There are no
> guarantees for anything when you are dealing with living things"
all we
> can do is try to stack the odds in the dogs favour.
>
> As an aside, I am curious to know when you (by you I mean you guys
in
> the US) commit to having your dogs hip scored then are you
committed to
> having the scores entered into the database for good or bad? By
this I
> mean at the x ray stage, there is a suspicion in the UK that a lot
of
> the improvement in our scores has occurred because Vets are becoming
> more skilled at reading the x rays themselves and so plates with bad
> hips now rarely go in front of the panel ensuring that the breed
> averages come down even though the incidence of the disease remains
the
> same (the other get around used over here is breeders take known
good
> dogs into be x rayed a number of times as different dogs, they can
get
> away with this because micro chipping or tattooing aren't mandatory
for
> these assessments so the vet relies on the breeders honesty)
>
> Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: weimaraner@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:weimaraner@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of karen sandvold
> Sent: 26 August 2008 17:01
> To: weimaraner@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [weimaraner] article of interest / pedigreed dogs
exposed
>
> And just because some says it's detrimental to line breed doesn't
mean
> it is any more detrimental than breeding one breed to another where
you
> may have hidden "bad" genes for many generations.
> Karen
>