Tomorrow morning, at about 7:30 am, the Today Show (NBC) will show a short clip from Pedigree Dogs Exposed, and also have a few words from James Serpell, a veterinarian and Professor of Humane Ethics & Animal Welfare at the University of Pennsylvania.
Then, tomorrow night, is the main event on BBC America (check your local TV guide for the channel).
Don't have time for TV? Don't get cable?
The good news is that you can see the show at the links below.
Remember ...
- If it looks ugly, it is because it is ugly.
- If it looks immoral, it's because it is immoral.
Two things need to be done if we are ever going to get on the road to right:
- Stop intentionally breeding dogs for deformities, oddities, defects and exaggerations.
- End the breeding of dogs in closed registries, and ban the Kennel Club registration of any dog with a four-generation coefficient of inbreeding of higher than 16%.
- Related Links:
** Inbred Thinking
** Making and Breaking Dogs In the Show Ring
6 comments:
It's a shame it won't be shown on a major network here.
And Animal Planet is out.
They have dog shows on every Saturday morning.
I don't believe in mandates, but if you're going to mandate, 16% in 4 generations is quite high. The 10 Generation on a dog that tightly line-bred is could be close to 40%. I try to keep 10 generation COI's under 15%. Most of the published data suggests that once you go above 12.5% with a 10 generation COI, longevity suffers significantly.
My foundation bitch has a 1.5% COI on 4 generations, and 7% COI on 10. One of my recent litters was 1.9% at 4 generations, but 12.9% at 10. I have breeders fight with me all the time suggesting that once a dog is 'off the paper' (i.e., beyond the 4th generation) he no longer matters in the pedigree. They have a hard time grasping that a dog's influence can be just as strong through background inbreeding (i.e., showing up 50 times in generations 6-10, for example) as if he was a parent or grandparent.
Mine is not a particularly popular with a lot of older breeders; however, the proof is in the pudding. I produce healthy, sound dogs that are consistent in type with low COIs, and I do a lot of winning, etc.
I have beautiful male, 9 months old, who has a 10 generation COI of .029% although I'm missing some ancestors on one side in Gen's 7+ because they were imports. It may be as high as 1% with complete data, but not much more than that.
C
Carolyn, when you say "I don't believe in mandates," what do you mean?
You don't believe in building codes? You don't believe in the Food and Drug Administration, consumer protections, speed limits and the Ten Commandments, (which I always like to point out are not the "Ten Suggestions"). Mandates are ALL law and regulation and without them it is anarchy, misery and a constant war of neighbor-against-neighbor.
Yes, a 16% COI is VERY high. That's for a reason. Law should not over-reach. In fact, it must not over-reach if it is to be adpted and accepted. The law may reasonably mandate safety features on a car, and (less reasonably) mandate minimum fuel standards and emissions, and (even less reasonably) reward some things such as domestic content while penalizing others (a luxury tax), but it probably should not cover paint color, cup holders, and what type of radio that is installed in the dashboard.
If you read "Inbred Thinking" (link provided in post), you will see that experience has shown that registries that limit maximum COI to 15% or 16% have a group population COI that is less than 5%, which is what we find in top working dog populations the world over. The very act of limiting COI means that folks have to calculate it, and so they begin to understand that a higher number is, generally, something to be avoided and is (generally) antithetical to performance. In regulation the general theory is very near a law: If you are required to count it, and it is bad, there will be less of it over time, and if you are required to count it, and it s good, there will be more of it over time. Right now, dog breeders count how many Champions are in a pedigree (and never mind if it is the same stud dog four times in four generations). Requiring a COI calculation is the antidote to that.
As for a 10-generation COI calculation, it is not needed. Do you know your ancestors 10 generations back? I doubt it. Do we require humans to do a COI calculation before breeding? No. We do, however, ban marriage between relations closer than first cousins (though first cousins matings are prefered in much of the world, and both Sewell Wright, who invented the COI calculation, and Francis Galton, who invented the field of eugenics, married their first cousins).
The fact that a computer can do a 10-generation COI calculation does not mean that the number that results is very illuminating, no matter how large or precise it may seem on the surface. The reason for this has to do with genetic drift -- the genetic "wobble" that occurs every time any two animals or plants breed. A four-generation COI can reasonably be requried for all dogs and it tells you all you need to know. In a sense, it's a bit like a watch: a 5-minute accuracy is good enough in the real world, never mind the existence of atomic clocks which give use meaningles and useless precision.
As for the impact of COI on longevity, it is far less clear than its impact on fecundity (fertility and litter size). If one is truely interested in extending canine longevity, COI is not the first, second, third, fourth of even fifth thing to look at: breed size, breed standards, and breed type are (1-3), followed by various laws that would make it more dificult for peole to casually own and breed dogs (in order to reduce dogs dumped into shelters, dog allowed to run loose to be hit by cars, etc.)
Patrick
I'll have to put a note on my calender to watch for major reactions (such as kicking and screaming from the AKC) on the 11th. It'll be mighty interesting exactly how this'll go over on this side of the pond.
I'm with Retrieverman, I wish the major networks would carry it. It's a documentary that's at least PBS-worthy.
The 10 generation COI calculation IS important when you are dealing with a closed population -- e.g. an isolated island, some species of zoo animals, and dog breeds who have been isolated in closed registries.
Particularly true when there has been a small founder population. That damage is done, and the only way to undo it is to bring in totally new genetics. (Preferably animals that can provide a genetic alternative to whatever specific disorders plague a given breed.) It is different with registries that restricted inbreeding from the beginning.
I'm afraid that the current sound-bite emphasis on just two factors -- breeding for extreme conformation points, and up-front inbreeding -- will obscure the need for opening up gene pools because of the prevalence of background inbreeding in many kennel club breeds.
It's important in a "declining amount of relevancy" kind of way.
Remember: If you can't get the AKC to ban mother-son, brother-sister INCEST, a 10-generation COI calculation is beyond fantasy.
AN achievable goal MIGHT be a ban on incest, and a real pipedream is a four-generation COI of 16% or less. Reach for more, and the backlash gets stronger and NOTHING gets done. Which is what the AKC wants.
90% of what is needed can be done with the first two steps. The last 10 percent is another battle for our children to fight in another era. Remember that the perfect is the enemy of the better and the good.
P
Post a Comment