Westminster Dog Show - oh dear!

Any doggie fans out there? The Westminster show is an annual showcase for the coiffed, over-bred pedigreed canine and their equally afflicted owners.

Apparently, every true dog lover is appalled by this year's champ, a pekingese who looks like a hairy caterpillar crash-landed face-first from another planet.

The Pudden and her Mama shake their heads that dogs apparently are no longer required to look like dogs. Let's all hope newt-breeding won't ever go in the same direction....

Molch said:

a pekingese who looks like a hairy caterpillar crash-landed face-first from another planet

Click to expand...

I like this description
And I will never forget the words of my ethology teacher: the pug looks like a hybrid of a rat and an earthworm...
When I see a small, wolf-originated unidentifiable mammal, I always try to guess what animals were crossed resulting it. This led to the following names: "guinea lamb", "wingless bat" or simply "rat".
And I always think of that its ancestors were wolves those hunted wild boars and deers, but this I-don't-know-what can be killed by a cat (I heard about a case when that happened to a chihuahua)...

I was reading not long ago an article about genetic diseases, syndromes, etc, in purebred dogs and how this problems are tremendously common. It´s quite unsurprising when you think about it, it´s what you get when you selectively breed only for fenotypes based on extremely superfitial and subjective criteria (and i don´t mean to say with this that i think all of it is bad -just most of it-). The exact same process is going on with axolotls...i despair of the possibility of it happening at the same scale with other species...and knowing that in all likelihood it´s going to happen, doesn´t help one bit.

That´s one bloody unfortunate and ugly wolf, by the way.

That's why there is chocolate, vanilla, rum raisin, strawberry.......everyone's taste is not the same.
The peke, however, was perfect for its breed standard. Me,,,,,I have a strong weakness for beagles and labs ----plain Jane's of the dog world.

Azhael said:

I was reading not long ago an article about genetic diseases, syndromes, etc, in purebred dogs and how this problems are tremendously common.

Click to expand...

The King Charles Spaniel is the perfect example of selectively bred dogs gone bad.

Pedigree Dogs Exposed Full Movie - YouTube

I'm just waiting for all the Thai Ridgeback owners to start "line breeding" and crapping in the gene pool. As far as "domesticated" dogs go, they're one of the few with minimal issues.

That documentary was mentioned in the article, but i figured an hour of watching dogs was anathema to me. I´ll give it a go.

I will never understand or even condone breeding animals for aesthetics alone, especially when it affects their health and well-being. Breeding for practicality while ensuring a breed's health and welfare is one thing, but just for a fashion statement is another. We have a rescued "Miniature" Yorkshire Terrier that is a perfect poster-dog for what this breeding does. He has a luxating patella, heart problems, eye and allergy issues, breathing issues and teeth problems. He was likely bought as a 'purse dog' and the owners didn't like having to try and potty train him (2nd most difficult breed to housetrain). We adopted him at 10 months old, and he has to wear a belly-wrap diaper because he's a habitual marker.

The AKC and other 'breeding associations' can preen and pump out their chests all they want as they claim they work for the animal's welfare. But when a breed standard INVENTED by your club and constantly enforced leads to the most unnatural, unhealthy and downright inhumane body conditions you can imagine, they are no better than those who breed fighting chickens and fighting dogs.

The same goes for those who want to make 'designer' pets like strange crossbreeds of reptiles, amphibians and others. Varieties of coloration is one thing, but when it goes so far that it changes the viability of a species or specializes it to be only aesthetic, that's just wrong.

nwmnnaturalist said:

The same goes for those who want to make 'designer' pets like strange crossbreeds of reptiles, amphibians and others. Varieties of coloration is one thing, but when it goes so far that it changes the viability of a species or specializes it to be only aesthetic, that's just wrong.

Click to expand...

Burmball anyone? Burmese python to a ball python....

Alot of the reptile community is also guilty of breeding for colours/genetics that can be detrimental to the health and wellbeing. They've had ALOT of issues with albino boa constrictors (eye problems, eyes missing, extra skin, deformed spines) as well as super motley boa constrictors. I don't believe there's been a super motley boa that's made it to 3 years yet. Spider genetics of ball pythons... their horrible head wobble that only occurs in ball pythons that carry the spider gene. Even my bumblebee ball python had a fairly noticeable head wobble

Seen the documentary. My hands were constantly twitching with an unbearable desire to slap faces.
I find it utterly surreal that people can be so blind so as not to see how inmoral it is to purposefully breed animals with obvious and serious pathologies. It´s not just ignoring it, it´s actually seeking it (as they comment in the documentary, to the point of culling healthy animals). I think in the majority of purebred dog keepers it´s a matter of gross ignorance, but in the case of professional breeders, vets and people involved in those horrible shows, i get a real sense of evil :S People who are aware and yet delude themselves into thinking it´s ok and justify it with ridiculous excuses deserve no sympathy whatsoever from me. They are cruel, inmoral bastards, and that´s to put it mildly.
If people who desire brachycephaly, heart problems, blindness, spina bifida, etc, on their animals, really love them, it´s the sickest most disgusting sort of love i´ve ever heard off.

I have a little disagreement with breeding for practicality. Sure, if you take into account the breed´s welfare and health while enhancing a characteristic that doesn´t have negative effects on them, that´s fine with me, but sadly, that´s not reality. When people breed for practicality they are also dramatically increasing inbreeding and selecting for "bad genes" unwittingly. Plus some useful (for us) characteristics imply pathologies in the animals. In defense of past generations, they didn´t know better nor did they have the means to do something about it had they known. Today, that´s not an excuse anymore...

This problem is so widespread in captive animals nowadays that it really makes you despair. When the boxer in the documentary was having a seizure i kept thinking of spider ball pythons and enigma leopard geckos. The world of reptiles to my mind has a terrible future...but it´s everywhere....there´s not a single widespread captive bred "pet" that doesn´t have examples of problems (some mild, some bloody terrible) caused by terrible, ignorant, based on insane standards, artifitial selection.
I also have to say that even at the level of skin coloration things can go really wrong. Some fenotypic variations appear to be entirely harmless (as is the case with many lines of melanistics, erythristics and such things) and i have no quarrel with those, but others have a different genetic origin and can sometimes be the manifestation of a pathology as it the case with spider ball pythons, or be associated with kinks and malformations.


One final thought, whoever thought brachycephaly was a "good" thing was dumber than a box of rocks.


Edit: Sorry, after all the agonizing rambling, Grete had beat me to it xD

Jan said:

That's why there is chocolate, vanilla, rum raisin, strawberry.......everyone's taste is not the same.
The peke, however, was perfect for its breed standard. Me,,,,,I have a strong weakness for beagles and labs ----plain Jane's of the dog world.

Click to expand...

but that breed standard is the problem: if the breed standard calls for a crippled animal with crooked legs and a squashed face, then something is very wrong.

Pekingese are an ancient breed that have been around since the time of the Chinese Emperors. Back then, they did NOT look like this poor dog. They still had faces and legs they could run on. If you google Peke champions of just a few decades ago, you'll see a difference.

The breed standards have changed to accommodate human fashion, not to serve the health of the animal. I don't like the idea of a living animal as a fashion accessory...

maybe there's some hope; I found this in a wikipedia article on Pekes:

"In an effort to address the breathing difficulties caused by the Peke's flat face, the Kennel Club (UK) significantly changed the breed standard in October 2008, removing the clause that the "profile [should be] flat with nose well up between eyes" and adding instead that the "muzzle must be evident".[3] This was in response to public opinion following the BBC programme, Pedigree Dogs Exposed. The breed standards of two other flat faced breeds, the Pug and English Bulldog, were soon also changed."

Whoa Molch - easy, take a deep breath. My comment was not directed at over-breeding, gene pools, designer dogs or anything along those lines. A Peek won best of show at the premier dog show. Not your cup of tea or mine...but the Peek still won. Nothing more/nothing less.

Jan said:

Whoa Molch - easy, take a deep breath. My comment was not directed at over-breeding, gene pools, designer dogs or anything along those lines. A Peek won best of show at the premier dog show. Not your cup of tea or mine...but the Peek still won. Nothing more/nothing less.

Click to expand...

I'm breathing.. I'm not upset at you nor ever was....no problem :happy:

but yeah...many dog-loving people, including myself, are troubled that the Peke won. Because, ya know, it's a nationally televised dog show and we worry that this will send the message that it is okay for dogs to be bred to be congenital cripples. That's all, really, no more no less