Culling puppies

[Lilavati]

I have to side with the no merle X merle crowd. There's something deeply repugnant about breeding a "perfect" dog at the cost of the lives of puppies. Perhaps in a very small breed it would be justified on rare occasion, but there is no shortage of good Aussies in the world.

Its not the culling I find repugnant here . . . its creating a 25% chance per puppy of a need to cull that's really disturbing.

[Romy]

Originally Posted by Lilavati

I have to side with the no merle X merle crowd. There's something deeply repugnant about breeding a "perfect" dog at the cost of the lives of puppies. Perhaps in a very small breed it would be justified on rare occasion, but there is no shortage of good Aussies in the world.

Its not the culling I find repugnant here . . . its creating a 25% chance per puppy of a need to cull that's really disturbing.

Exactly.

If you are producing a litter, chances are not every puppy is going to be a super prospect for what you want anyway.

So why on earth would you do a breeding that has a 25% chance of producing unviable puppies?

So the sire and dam are perfect matches....so what if the puppies that happen to be born with the perfect bodies/drive you wanted have no eyes? That does nobody any good. You're narrowing your choices of what you can work with from the litter, by doing a breeding that is known and likely to produce deformities.

The only way I could accept a merle X merle breeding is if it was an accident with an unexpressed merle.

[FoxyWench]

im with romy and the others on this zoom...

i could understand if this was some extreemly rare breed with a very limited gene pool and having to do the best with every dog there is in the world...

but in a breed like aussies, there are more than enough aussies in the world that theres absolulty no reason to think the ONLY great match for a good merle girl is a merle male...there are plenty of other potential mates for that girl...

a responsbible breeder breeds to BETTER the breed...
to do this even in a working breed, you choose a dog to compliment the bitch in question...
this includes drive, personality and MOST IMPORTANTLY HEALTH...
you wouldnt breed a female with hip displaysia to a male with hip displasia as it increases the risks that the puppies will also have displaysia...

so why is merle to merle any different...
there are other choices for a stud, if the goal is to produce the best, why automatically add yet another risk?!

[ihartgonzo]

Merle to merle breeding is irresponsible, period.

Bringing a dog into this world with a 25% chance of being blind or deaf is unfathomable. I have worked with many deaf and blind dogs, neither or which live full lives, because of the selfishness/irresponsibility of the people who bred them. Blind dogs especially just break my heart. Always bumping into walls, hurting themselves, and in a state of perpetual confusion. :,( Deaf dogs are much better off and sometimes I don't even realize that they are deaf, but literally 1 out of 10 Aussies in rescue *at least* are deaf or blind, and it's so difficult for them to find a home. I wish their d-bag breeders would take responsibility and keep all of the unsound dogs that they produce, rather than killing them or dumping them at a shelter.

[LauraLeigh]

Originally Posted by FoxyWench

actually lizzy its EASIER to train a deaf dog than it is to train a hearing dog...
the biggest challeng is recal since they cant here you and most people training deaf dogs for recall use a vibrating collar (or ligths at night). but hand signals dont have to be "official" (i make most of mine up when i was working with my past deaf dog and the deaf foster dog) and dogs learn hand signals MUCH quicker/easier than they do human words.

blind dogs just need ot be trained on verbal commands and need a person whos willing to build confidence through guidence (the dog must trust its owner) and one whos willing to keep their house layout how it is and keep a routein...most blind dogs learn they way around a new place in no time, ok so they bump into a few things in the beginning but there no harder to train than having a dog who can see...
my friend has a blind aussie who runs agility, obedience and frestyle...in truth if you didnt look at her face you would have absolutly no idea she had no vision (shes missing both her eyes)

blind dogs are certainly a little more of a challeng than most deaf dogs, but neither are so disabled that they are hard to train...
i think the lessening number of people willing to take on "disabled" dogs is based on 1: having the "prefect dog" people forget that these dogs can be just as if not even more perfect...King, my dane growing up was my angel, he was 100% deaf and blind in one eye but he was smart as a whip and will alsways be my first true heart dog...
and 2: based on the fact that most think raising these "special needs" dogs is going to be millions times more "challenging" than raising a normal puppy...in truth, its the exact same, you just modify the training method a little.



thus far every deaf dog ive had trained easier than those with perfect hearing, and ive never seen dogs bond as strongly to their people as those with vision impairments.

Off topic, but while I think doing obedience is great, I cannot imagine doing agility with a blind dog.... I am pretty sure you would not even be allowed at the venues I compete at...

I have a fully blind dog, and have competed at agility, I just cannot imagine how it would work... How would they know when to jump, where the end of the contact eq. is? I can't even imagine letting Di on contact eq. without vision, what if she tripped?

I think letting a blind dog on agility eq. is very unsafe, no matter how well trained the dog is!! I just can't wrap my brain around that.... Di is so good in her own environment, that many have been shocked to hear she is blind, even away from home she does well when verbally reassured. I had her at the Vets today for her check up and one of the people in the waiting room was amazed how quickly she adapts... but I still would never do agility with her.

ON topic....

I see no reason to cull (as in kill) pups that will be healthy but don't meet a standard, etc... These pups can go to pet homes, Pups that have a serious issue that will affect their quality of life I do understand...

I don't know much about the Merle issues, but would, from what I do know, never do a breeding that had a high chance of ill pups...

[FoxyWench]

they dont compete in formal events.
they attend an agility club who do "fun runs" and modified courses for special needs and underconfident dogs.
the jumps are all done on verbal cue and other obsticals are done by touch. its also not done at high speed.

its more of a confidence building excersize but the point being that a blind dog CAN do these things with the right training and confidence building excersizes and the right person, they can still absolutly lead full happy lives doing things a dog who can see can do...

her dog LOVES it, she says the word "agility and she gets super excited, cant wait to go and has to be held back at the go line.
ob is done on long line and freestyle is extreemly close contact lol but she loves to do it all, shes also a therapy dog and works with "special needs" children showing them that their "disabilities" dont have to hold them back

[Zoom]

The "best merle to merle" was more of a practice from the earlier days of the breed, when these were strictly ranch dogs and ranchers were working with the surrounding 'best' dogs. There wasn't the ability to go get straws from 1000 miles away. It's not a practice that needs to be carried out today and 98% of ASCA agrees completely with not breeding merle to merle. There are those who are still willing to gamble to get the best cross possible, especially when they're dealing with their own ranch dogs/lines.

Neither are practices I agree with.

There is a flood of lethal white dogs out there right now because idiots and millers have started doing merle x merle breedings because then they figured they're 'guaranteed' to get all merle in a litter, which will sell quicker because they look more unique and flashy. I actually do wish those jerks would take responsibility and cull their LW's, because it's not bad enough they're producing blind/deaf dogs, but epilepsy does run in Aussies, and there is an increasing amount of HD cases...and having a dog that got lumped with all those issues, it's just kinder to cull at birth. But everyone knows rescues love the hard luck cases and everyone can sit back and go "oh don't kill that dog, it can have a great home! no, I don't want it, and no one I know wants a blind/deaf lame dog with epilepsy either but you can't kill it!"

Maybe I'm just too pragmatic/realistic, but with all the healthy, fully adoptable Aussies sitting in rescue/shelters/foster homes right now, it just doesn't seem right to deny a very adoptable dog for one that has a "hard luck" story in the hopes someone's heartstrings will be tugged enough to take on that challenge.

[Xandra]

Originally Posted by Zoom

But everyone knows rescues love the hard luck cases and everyone can sit back and go "oh don't kill that dog, it can have a great home! no, I don't want it, and no one I know wants a blind/deaf lame dog with epilepsy either but you can't kill it!"

Maybe I'm just too pragmatic/realistic, but with all the healthy, fully adoptable Aussies sitting in rescue/shelters/foster homes right now, it just doesn't seem right to deny a very adoptable dog for one that has a "hard luck" story in the hopes someone's heartstrings will be tugged enough to take on that challenge.

Very true.

[lizzybeth727]

Originally Posted by Zoom

But everyone knows rescues love the hard luck cases and everyone can sit back and go "oh don't kill that dog, it can have a great home! no, I don't want it, and no one I know wants a blind/deaf lame dog with epilepsy either but you can't kill it!"

Maybe I'm just too pragmatic/realistic, but with all the healthy, fully adoptable Aussies sitting in rescue/shelters/foster homes right now, it just doesn't seem right to deny a very adoptable dog for one that has a "hard luck" story in the hopes someone's heartstrings will be tugged enough to take on that challenge.

My thoughts exactly.

[FoxyWench]

while i agree with you on that zoom...

i also feel that instead of telling breeders to simply "cull" the potentially "damaged" offspring from a merle to merle...
mabe make it more taboo to BREED merle to merle...mabe back in the day...but now theres plenty of other aussies in the world to not have to breed that kind of risk.

the stuff on the breed club page just makes it seem like they dont care if you merle to merle as long as your willing to cull the puppies...and the part about getting hit by the family car because it didnt hear/see the car is like *blink blink* wha?!
while im sure on a ranch the risk of tractor is there, in a normal home (where a vision/hearing impaired puppy woudl go) no dog should be running around loose around a driveway...