Rhodesian's Ridge Discussions

So long as the dog was healthy - it wouldn't matter either way to me.

I don't believe in dogs being killed just because they don't conform to what someone thinks they should (looks-wise).

Vets should stop being complicit too - if there isn't a health-related reason to put a dog down, it shouldn't be killed. (And that goes for strays and dogs in rescue too - perhaps that will finally get the govt to do something about the problem!! But that's a topic for another thread).

What a lot of scaremongering - here's the section from RR bred club's code of ethics http://www.rhodesianridgebacks.org/codeofethics.html

I'm not saying that this did not happen in the past when culling was much more acceptable across many breeds particularly when breeds were being created but to say that today

is simply not true and is just more sensationalistic pedigree dog bashing

Exactly right!!!! Why cull pups that you can sell? It makes no sense. Some of you know that I bred a litter of Estrelas recently and there was a blue pup in the litter. I have absolutely no doubt that had she been born in Portugal she would have ended up in a bucket. I sold her to a friend of mine where she will live as a pet for her whole life. Not only could I not cull a healthy pup, it actually makes no logical sense when there are homes out there.

A friend of mine recently lost her ridgeless Ridgeback aged 12 years. She was no less of a Ridgeback and a lovely pet, which is all she was wanted for.

Your dog may have been ok, but hundreds of others are born deaf solely because of the colour. Wrong IMO.

It is definitely wrong to breed for white boxers, however if one is born, it should not be euth'd just because of colour! Breeders here often just automatically kill white boxers, on the off chance it might be deaf. Totally unacceptable!

No healthy dog should be pts. Culled through neutering, yes, but not killed!

I think it's barbaric to put healthy puppies to sleep purely because they don't conform to some arbitary notion of breed standard. If a good percentage of RRs are born ridgeless regardless of parentage then the standard is clearly warped to begin with. Disgusting that people are advocating it to be honest, what's wrong with neutering and selling to pet homes? If a breeder isn't prepared to deal with puppies which don't potentially meet the standard then they shouldn't breed full stop.

Well said!!!

As an owner of white boxers dont get me started on culling ...

I haven't read all the thread yet so apologies if you have clarified but where do you get your info from re a lot of breeders culling ridgeless dogs and that RR shouldn't have ridges?

The majority of RR are born with ridges as the ridge gene is dominant.

I to had a ridgeless ridgeback back in 1990 the owner of the stud dog said she would have to be pts but the bitch owner said she had been pts and gave her to me on the agreement that she was spayed. She was a lovley very lazy sun worshiper who lived to 11 and then sercumed to stomache cancer

If I was buying a ridgeback then it would be great if it had a ridge (for obvious reasons) but if it didnt then I dont think it would really bother me that much. As long as the dog is healthy in mind and body then who really cares. If its not for KC show world then why cant it be spayed/neutered when old enough and kept as a pet. Surely beats being murdered.

I agree with PTS animals when they need their suffering ended, but certainly not when they are a healthy animal perfectly suited to be a family pet. Since most dogs that show breeders breed are going to be living life with the sole purpose of being a loved, cared for member of the family only, that is what breeders should also be taking responsibility when breeding, not whether they need culled on looks alone. If breeders and people who buy from breeders want to say that is responsible breeding, (to cull healthy animals) well quite honestly what a load of boll*cks.

That's the risk the breeder takes when they decide to breed pedigree dogs, not the buyer and certainly not the puppy. So let them take the fall, its theirs to take IMO.

I would imagine in this day and age that most breeders of RR would surely home the pet dog rather than kill it but if anyone who breeds RR reads this and likes to cull their innocent healthy puppies in the sake of their name, just pass them to me instead and that will save your face.

This is a breed I like a lot; if I wasn't so nuts about Labs, the RR would be on my wish list. If I did have a RR then frankly I wouldn't give a damn if the dog had a ridge or not - as long as the dog was healthy. Surely that is what counts?

If any breeders out there are killing puppies purely because they are born ridgeless then shame on them. It is appalling.

We have created these often arbitrary standards of how dogs 'should' look, but it's the dogs that pay the price ultimately.