Looking for a good place to get a puppy

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

No, I actually meant ban all breeders. What are they needed for? I can see exceptions being made for working dogs, like service animals, police dogs..etc. But I'm sorry,we don't need uneducated people breeding Cocker spaniels because they want to make a quick buck.

Check the geniology of dogs at breeders. There is so much inbreeding, and they breed dogs for looks, not for health of the animal.

You want a puggle? No, sorry. Here's a border collie mix from the humane society.

I used to work with a guy who bred Weimaraners​. I wouldn't have trusted him to breed ants.

People seeking out a specific breed want one as healthy as possible and to avoid expensive veterinary bills so getting a dog from a reputable breeder is the best chance to get a dog free of genetic diseases. For example a breed like the Basenji has inherited Fanconi syndrome and almost became extinct in North America and nowadays the only way to ensure you aren't getting a disease free Basenji is to get one from a reputable breeder that's breading dogs without the strain. Getting a dog for a family can be a big decision and for some people it's nice to know the history of the dog prior to making them a part of your family so your kids don't get attached to a dog you have to put down early.

There seems to be a lot of generalization with some that dog breeding = puppy mill. On one hand we are told not to fear Muslims because terrorists are a small extreme but then you have stuff like this where all dog breeders are vilified because of poor practices of some breeders. Some common sense would be nice.

[RubberDuck]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

People seeking out a specific breed want one as healthy as possible and to avoid expensive veterinary bills so getting a dog from a reputable breeder is the best chance to get a dog free of genetic diseases.

Except that you are 100% wrong.

http://www.instituteofcaninebiology....-dogs-the-data

Study done on 27000 dogs comparing 24 genetic disorders.

"This study concluded that purebred dogs have a higher risk of at least 10 of the 24 genetic disorders examined."

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

People seeking out a specific breed want one as healthy as possible and to avoid expensive veterinary bills so getting a dog from a reputable breeder is the best chance to get a dog free of genetic diseases. For example a breed like the Basenji has inherited Fanconi syndrome and almost became extinct in North America and nowadays the only way to ensure you aren't getting a disease free Basenji is to get one from a reputable breeder that's breading dogs without the strain. Getting a dog for a family can be a big decision and for some people it's nice to know the history of the dog prior to making them a part of your family so your kids don't get attached to a dog you have to put down early.

There seems to be a lot of generalization with some that dog breeding = puppy mill. On one hand we are told not to fear Muslims because terrorists are a small extreme but then you have stuff like this where all dog breeders are vilified because of poor practices of some breeders. Some common sense would be nice.

Originally Posted by RubberDuck

Except that you are 100% wrong.

http://www.instituteofcaninebiology....-dogs-the-data

Study done on 27000 dogs comparing 24 genetic disorders.

"This study concluded that purebred dogs have a higher risk of at least 10 of the 24 genetic disorders examined."

Sigh. Notice I started off by isolating the specific breed part? That pretty well takes mixed breed out of the argument. Lots of people want specific breeds and the best way to ensure you are getting a healthy specific breed is to get one from a reputable breeder.

[Jason14h]

You are 100% wrong, except that you're wrong about an argument you didn't actually make!

Reading for the win!

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

40 years ago purebreds where only really the concern of a small number of dog show types, all the rest of us had muts that looked 'mostly' like a Lab or 'mostly' like a Shepherd

Stop making things up.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

All purebred dogs are, by definition, in bred, it is what makes them 'pure'.
40 years ago purebreds where only really the concern of a small number of dog show types, all the rest of us had muts that looked 'mostly' like a Lab or 'mostly' like a Shepherd, this was a healthy dog population, what we are doing now is normalising genetic abnormality and it makes no difference how much genetic testing you do, if you just turn out Beagles, no matter how you do it, you are inbreeding and eventually you will produce unhealthy traits.

Where did you get that information? It's wrong. And luckily lots of breeders are breeding for different traits now and expanding the genetic pool within a breed of dog. There are 60 million golden retrievers in North America. It's pretty easy to not inbreed them and still get a golden retriever.

[aaronck]

Had a friend lose her 5 year old Doodle recently, she got it from an at the time reputable breeder. It suffered liver failure due to it's liver being very undersized- the breeder has changed names and is still selling dogs today. As with everything, there are good examples as well as bad ones. Diligence is required!

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Where did you get that information? It's wrong. And luckily lots of breeders are breeding for different traits now and expanding the genetic pool within a breed of dog. There are 60 million golden retrievers in North America. It's pretty easy to not inbreed them and still get a golden retriever.

Oh for gods sake, it makes no difference if you have 60 million or 600 million if they all originate from a few hundred breeding pairs that conformed to some arbitrary breed standard 60 or 70 years ago then all and any offspring will have some of or all of the problems that the original dogs had and those problems will be amplified over generations.

one fifth of all retrievers have hip or elbow dysplasia, an entirely genetic condition due wholly to breeding within a small gene pool, the numbers of dogs within that tiny gene pool are utterly irrelevant. 15 million retrievers have a common genetic disorder and the only way to stop that from increasing to 20 or 30 or 60 million is to breed in other types of dogs wholly unrelated, you know, muts.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Oh for gods sake, it makes no difference if you have 60 million or 600 million if they all originate from a few hundred breeding pairs that conformed to some arbitrary breed standard 60 or 70 years ago then all and any offspring will have some of or all of the problems that the original dogs had and those problems will be amplified over generations.

one fifth of all retrievers have hip or elbow dysplasia, an entirely genetic condition due wholly to breeding within a small gene pool, the numbers of dogs within that tiny gene pool are utterly irrelevant. 15 million retrievers have a common genetic disorder and the only way to stop that from increasing to 20 or 30 or 60 million is to breed in other types of dogs wholly unrelated, you know, muts.

Oh for god's sake that's not inbreeding. Inbreeding is within family lines not the greater gene pool. Are Eastern Europeans all inbred because they're more likely to get Crohn's Disease? I get what you're saying and you're not wrong about purebred health issues but you're certainly wrong about inbreeding and you're likely wrong about breeding for different, healthier traits.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Oh for god's sake that's not inbreeding. Inbreeding is within family lines not the greater gene pool. Are Eastern Europeans all inbred because they're more likely to get Crohn's Disease? I get what you're saying and you're not wrong about purebred health issues but you're certainly wrong about inbreeding and you're likely wrong about breeding for different, healthier traits.

If the 'gene pool' is from a handful of breeding pairs that won the Westminster dog show or crufts in the 1940's and in order to get your registration you have to breed your dog within a specific set of dogs that also come from the same background then that's inbreeding, it is, in effect, breeding within a family, even if that family has been bred out to 60 million, Eastern Europeans aren't generally specifically bred to other east Europeans from the same village in order to get them to have ginger hair or the like, east Europeans marry all kinds of other people thus thining out and changing the gene combinations, sometimes they marry Genius's sometimes they marry a Trump, either way they aren't restricted to a small group of genes that contain hideous health issues that slowly, generation after generation, dominate their existance.

I out of five retrievers are genetically unfit, 20% totally certain to need expensive painful medical procedures no matter what to fix a condition because the Kennel Club decided in its infinite wisdom that dogs look cool if their back slopes downward to their tail thus giving the appearance of alertness.

[OMG!WTF!]

Yeah anyway purebred is not the same as inbred.

[Jason14h]

I out of five retrievers are genetically unfit, 20% totally certain to need expensive painful medical procedures no matter what to fix a condition because the Kennel Club decided in its infinite wisdom that dogs look cool if their back slopes downward to their tail thus giving the appearance of alertness.

But doesn't that tend to lead that we should NOW be breeding out the genetic defects in the best possible manner.

If I want a Golden Retriever, and one WITHOUT hip or eyes issues, isn't using a breeder who guarantees that the best plan?

Not everyone wants a Mutt, some people want a specific dog type. What's wrong with that?

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

But doesn't that tend to lead that we should NOW be breeding out the genetic defects in the best possible manner.

If I want a Golden Retriever, and one WITHOUT hip or eyes issues, isn't using a breeder who guarantees that the best plan?

Not everyone wants a Mutt, some people want a specific dog type. What's wrong with that?

The only way you can 'breed out' a genetic defect is to introduce other genetic material into the gene pool, any attempt to breed out the 20% hip dysplasia means a smaller gene pool to pick from which, in turn, creates other genetic problems.

You want to marry your cousin you can, but do it often enough you are going to get pin head babies, mother nature is uncompromising that way.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The only way you can 'breed out' a genetic defect is to introduce other genetic material into the gene pool, any attempt to breed out the 20% hip dysplasia means a smaller gene pool to pick from which, in turn, creates other genetic problems.

You want to marry your cousin you can, but do it often enough you are going to get pin head babies, mother nature is uncompromising that way.

We have a 45 million, from your own words, pool to choose from. Not quiet the same as marrying your cousin.....

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

We have a 45 million, from your own words, pool to choose from. Not quiet the same as marrying your cousin.....

AFC has a big family.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

We have a 45 million, from your own words, pool to choose from. Not quiet the same as marrying your cousin.....

The history of the Golden Retriever, from the Golden Retriever Breed Council.


Unlike many breeds, the development of the Golden Retriever in historical terms is fairly recent, and thanks to the painstaking research carried out by breed historians, firstly the late Elma Stonex, and latterly Val Foss and Frank and Anne Weekes, the history is quite defined and documented.
The breed originated from a series of matings carried out by Lord Tweedmouth from 1864 onwards. The starting point was his acquisition of a good looking yellow coloured Flat Coated Retriever which he took to his estate at Guisechan, near Inverness in Scotland. He mated this dog to a Tweed Water Spaniel, a breed now long extinct, and then bred on from the offspring of this mating using the occasional outcross to an Irish Setter, a second Tweed Water Spaniel and a black Flat Coated Retriever. The dogs produced proved to be grand workers, biddable and attractive. Puppies from the matings were given to friends and family, notably his nephew, Lord Ilchester, who also bred them. The dogs bred true to type, and so the forerunners of the breed we know today were established.
It was not until 1908 that the breed came into the public eye. Lord Harcourt had formed a great liking for the breed, and had gathered on to his estate at Nuneham Park, Oxford, a collection of the dogs descended from the original matings. He decided to exhibit them at the Kennel Club Show in 1908, where they created great interest. They were entered in a class for Any Variety Retriever, and described as Yellow Flatcoated Retrievers. The term 'Golden Retriever' was first coined around this time, and has been attributed to Lord Harcourt.

Basicaly 60 million dogs bred from a few pairs of dogs back on some estate in the UK a hundred years ago. That is text book inbreeding

The real irony is because the Kennel Club is so very good at tracing registered dogs breeding history, essentially compiling irrefutable family trees it is almost impossible to introduce any outside genetic influence once a breed is recognised and the genetic problems at that point start to multiply massively within the breed.

[J-Rhombus]

Well this is a bit more insight than I was looking for, but thanks for all the comments! haha

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by J-Rhombus

Well this is a bit more insight than I was looking for, but thanks for all the comments! haha

To be a bit more useful this would be my two cents worth for your situation, pure bred dogs, all of them, are inherently less healthy than mixed breeds but you can get something of the best of both worlds if you take your time and look for a mixed breed dog that has a lot of the one breed you like in it, I have a Jack Russell terrier, they are a none too pure a breed anyway having only been recognised quiet recently as a breed but my Jack is 25 pounds, around 10 pounds heavier than a 'proper Jack' a built with a heavy squat build, I'd guess he has some corgi or bull terrier in him. Everyone immediately recognises him as a Jack Russell but he has none of the Jacks normal skittishness and is as healthy as an ox.

If you get a pure bred dog you are essentially rolling the dice on a shorter more expensive life span, to me this is absurd, especially for a family pet, your kids will love any dog you bring home no matter what so why choose one with possible built in problems?

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by Bagor

What? Where did you hear this from and why do they think it is more applicable to rescue dogs? They just that bit more streetwise and know how to play the system better?

Seriously, I'd love to read any literature that supports your claim.

I don't know that there is research on it (or where to find it?) but I feel like anecdotal evidence is enough in this situation. ie that it can happen and is something people adopting need to be aware of.

https://muttabouttown.com/2013/03/06...dopting-a-dog/

"It can take a shelter dog 6-8 weeks or more to fully adjust to his new home. Don’t worry if his behavior doesn’t fall into place after the first week, or if it takes awhile for him to feel like your dog."

In this case it seems to be more talking bad behavior to good though.

This one talks about a "honeymoon period": http://www.snowdog.guru/adopted-husk...ddenly-change/

"The Honeymoon period refers to the time when a dog comes to his new home and everyone is excited and happy about their new relationship. During this time, the personality or temperament of the newly adopted dog may not accurately reflect the true nature of the dog. At some point, perhaps weeks or even months later, this Honeymoon Period ends and the true personality and nature of the dog can be seen. Often, this new dog personality may look radically different than the dog you were used to seeing."

Those were the first 2 google findings.

Plus I'm speaking from personal experience.

Edit: maybe you're right that it happens with breeder dogs too, but a potentially questionable past (ie dogs from the reserve who were abused) must increase the chance of the dog being aggressive after a period of settling in. And the fact that the average adoption is an older dog who will have less neuroplasticity for socialization and training.

[Amethyst]

It sounds like you've had a bad experience. I've had a lot of rescue dogs through my home, and while I don't disagree that it takes awhile to see their "true self" I find that it's not usually a big problem. The vast majority of dogs I've worked with have shown more "bad behaviours" at the beginning (fearfulness around people, not walking properly on a leash, snapping at people, house training problems) and then get much better once they've settled in and are comfortable.

There's also a big difference between a shelter environment (where all dogs are pretty much stressed to some degree) and a foster home (which is just a regular home setting). Most of the rescues in Calgary are foster-based.

Adjustment can take awhile, but a good rescue will work with an adopter to find the right fit and will be there if there is a problem. Sadly, there are some that will give you a dog immediately and then leave you on their own, in the same way there are good and bad breeders.

One way an adopter can avoid these rescues/ breeders is by not being impatient. The good places will want to check out your family (and let you check out them) and it may take a little while to find the right match. If you can show up in the morning and have a new dog by the afternoon, that is a big red flag that it is not a rescue / breeder / etc you should be dealing with.