Discussion in 'Showing - questions and answers' started by sarah_bailey, Feb 3, 2007.
In response to the 86 pups, that was over 5 years and the dogs were both brindle.
Sorry forgot to mention that the dogs are not owned by myself or by my vet and the dogs were not just health checked but were found to be geneticlly clear of problems. Could you please add this to my last post.
And seem to be incapable of understanding that there is only one purpose to showing - and that is selection of breeding stock.
But you're determined to turn it into some sort of mindless beauty contest? How sad.
Absolutely fine. Glad to know about it even. If it was a guaranteed fact (as it is with whites) that my dog, although not suffering himself WOULD produce affected offspring and - worse- increase the incidence of such a serious problem throughout the entire breed, I would cease to enter him in any form of breeding selection contest. I'd also neuter him - immediately. But then, I'm not trying to bastardise the show ring into an opportunity to "prove" that I've got a pretty dog If my dog isn't fit to be bred, he has no business being there.
You fail to understand (yet) again. It isn't colour that is at issue there - it is turning any animal into that sort of puppy production line. That's outright abuse, and as Julie said above - that poor bitch. You've got a pretty warped concept of "exploitation" if you're going to brag about that sort of practice. And at the same time label those who use the show ring for the reason it exists, proving that their dogs are good enough representatives of the breed to be considered as breeding stock, as "exploiting" their dogs? LOL - what's the weather like on your planet?
I agree wholeheartedly, regardlee of what color the dog is. I cannot get over how many treat their dogs as an enterprise. Do they even ask themselves what will happen to the pups? How many pups will they have, what will happen to those pups? So on and so forth, you get the picture. Because of people carelessly breeding for money, not only do we have the health and genetic problems, we also have way too many dogs in need of a home, sitting in shelters and rescues just waiting for a home, only to get put to sleep. I so wish it was harder to breed and animal than it is.
Not all Champions should be bred!
At this time I am one of those ppl that happens to enjoy showing for fun not for the all mighty title (yes that would be a plus). I'm not into Agility, rally, etc...at this time. I pick up my new pup this up coming weekend this pup will be my show prospect for fun and if we choose to breed him after his health testing, fine but that is not why I want to show. Sadly I have been told by many "well known" show/breeders that regardless if he turns out or finishes his Championship that I NEED to breed him because of his pedigree. Its not about beauty contest to me its all about having fun with my pets. IMO thats what it should be about. This is all just my opinion
Back to Whites!
Whites are not albino they don't come with all these health problems that ppl like to spread around. There is NO scientific evidence on this issues. Yes they have a little higher chance of being deaf than any colored boxer. If anyone wants to participate in a scientific study that is trying to get off the ground let me know. Just Being deaf has to do with the white coat not some strange genetic defect just like most of the white or predominantly white dogs you see like the bull terrier, Dalmatian, Great Pyrenees, etc....
Perhaps you should read a little more carefully also :rolleyes: The genetic condition under discussion - and the thing that permanently excludes white boxers from the breeding, and hence showing, pool - is deafness. And there is AMPLE scientific evidence on that one.
Btw: It isn't just a "little" higher chance of being deaf. Due to lack of pigment, one in five white boxers is bilaterally deaf. That's versus about 1.5% of coloured boxers. Very likely, the figures for both groups would be double if we all had our dogs BAER tested for unilateral deafness.
Just to put that into a little bit of perspective for you - the incidence of deafness in whites is over 130 times higher than in dogs with normal pigment. Start breeding those animals, and you will both dilute pigment and increase the incidence of genetic deafness throughout the entire breed.
You might also like to note that the gene responsible for white coat colour in the boxer is precisely the same one that produces white coat colour in the Dalmation. You do not have to guess what would happen to boxers if whites were introduced to the breeding pool - there's a prior example out there for all the world to see.
Nope, sorry, but there is absolutely no excuse for deliberately breeding a genetic problem like that into a dog breed.
Please do you have the link to this "scientific" evidence? Because of course you have evidence not just bias info from rescue groups.
BTW whites don't lack pigment only albinos do. Whites may lack the pigment cells in the inner ear and that is what makes them deaf.
I also guess its OK to breed 2 flashy together? When you have a very high chance of producing an entire litter of whites. Breeding a white with a genetic plain will only produce the very sought after flashy pup and no whites bit more research going into this type of breeding which I doubt most of these ppl careless to do.
I have had chats with many show/breeder most hope to have the whites brought back in. Its also being said that whites have less issues, and that they might help the over all health, and longevity of the breed.
Of course, and none from rescue groups (who see a disproportionate number of deaf whites - far higher than 20% in many cases) since I've yet to see a rescue that's qualified to make any statements whatsoever on the genetic cause of deafness in any dog.
You would do well to read the work of Drs Strain and Cattanach - both mammailian geneticists who've studied and documented the causes of deafness due to lack of pigment (and, since that seems to be important to you, so far as I'm aware neither are associated with any rescue groups anywhere in the world ). Both have done substantial amounts of work on the impact of the extreme white spotting allele of S - sw, which is what causes both white markings and deafness in this breed, and a few others. You can start here: http://www.steynmere.com/DALM_DEAFNESS.html, here: http://www.lsu.edu/deafness/Tufts.htm, here: http://www.lsu.edu/deafness/VetClinNA.htm, and here: http://www.lsu.edu/deafness/VetJDeaf2004.pdf
And once you've done that - and IF you understood it - then you won't be making statements like this...
"White" is most definitely lack of pigment. It's not just the inner ear that melanocytes are missing from either. Do you happen to know what the effect of lack of pigment on internal organs is? If so, there's a scientific community waiting to hear it. Or you'd rather go ahead without that knowledge, and damn the deafness issue to boot?
As for breeding of flashy dogs - that has been addressed many times on this site, including earlier in this very thread :rolleyes: Go read that - we don't need to repeat the same information over and over because you haven't bothered to read the whole thread.
That's, if possible, even worse. Seven litters in five years. Absolutely disgusting. That is beyond exploitation, it's flat-out abuse.
Countries whose respectable registries use the FCI standard also stamp 'Breeding Forbidden' on the pedigrees of white Boxers, so they cannot participate in shows. They don't need the disqualification. It is only in the 'alternative' organizations here in the US where that loophole exists.
Then you'll be more than happy to provide the details of this testing, as is required before you are permitted to discuss your breeding practices.
Of course. Here's a site with quite a bit of information on deafness in dogs and cats, including papers, studies, seminars, etc.:
Here is a very small sampling of the many scientific studies done on pigment-associated congenital sensorineural deafness in dogs:
So whites don't lack pigment, but they may lack pigment? No one is saying that whites are 100% pigment-free; they do, however, lack pigment in some areas (the white ones, for a start) and if one of those areas happens to be the inner ear, they will be deaf.
Hardly a "very high" chance of producing an entire litter of whites. Chances are very high, in fact, that you will *not* produce an entire litter of whites, but rather a litter of which 75% of the puppies are colored.
It may be "being said", but it is not remotely true. Whites are just as prone to genetic health issues - AS, ARVC, HD, hypothyroidism - as their colored littermates. None of these are color-related traits. *In addition* to this, whites are more prone to deafness.
Separate names with a comma.