Yellow Flat Coats? Controversial

You really are unbelievable, you threaten me and make sarcastic comments about Crufts, the very dog show that ensures the popularity of pedigree breeds. Which includes the FCR, and yet you despise pedigrees, what a bizarre set of opinions??

Are you by any chance a relative of JH, wouldn't surprise me?

Can you please show me the evidence of this diminished gene pool and what detrimental affect it has had on Flat Coats around the world please.

It WAS!! Do you mean next year?

LOL

History teaches us.

Sometimes we learn things when its too late.

I love the Breeds. Therefore I am not silent. Nor do I have to fall in line behind a status quo that has done more harm than good with their very Eugenics movement concepts applied towards their lineages within their pedigrees.

Sigh. Either you're a part of the problem or you are a part of the fix. Either way there will be the old school and the new. The rest is for the public to decide. And using Crufts as an example. Its clear what that public demands. Whats not clear is if the fancy understands that.?????

I like you Borderdawn. LOL.

Excellent! Could you answer the other question for me please then. This one:

Evidence of a diminished gene pool would be hereditary disorders common to a particular breed. I don't know about FCRs or whether they have any hereditary health issues, but if you close a gene pool through a registration system or similar, you then raise the incidence of recessive alleles which in turn, contribute to a proliferation of genetic problems. When diseases become specific to a particular breed, or when they are common to a particular breed, this is evidence that they are compromised in terms or their genetic diversity. The LUA dalmatian is a good example of this, and also shows that measures such as outcrossing can be put in place to combat this, and make a healthier breed for the future (if done carefully of course).

This abstract is from one of the most highly regarded scientific journals there is and explains much better than I ever could:

http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v10/n11/abs/nrg2664.html

Yep, I know what a diminished gene pool "can" do, we have seen that in some breeds not least the "NI" and "Ute"(not a breed but type) Id like to know what its done to Flat Coats as this seems to be a key point in Chatham Hills argument. I'd like also to know what a yellow Flat Coat has to offer the breed.

£££££££££`s

BD, I'd tell you you were wasting your breath, except in your case, you ain't. I'm glad you're spotted this thread, I can't be bothered once things get past polite, but I know that doesn't necessarily stand in your way ;-)

Having to go through repetition in a forum usually means someone is firing their bullets at you without having read your posts to begin with. Sigh.
“consider the histories and reflect upon the occurrences of the debilitating disorders we see today relative to the same FCR breed just several decades ago. To go from a 14 to 16 year average lifespan to 7 to 9 in a relatively short amount of time. Speaks worlds about the damage done. “

On a personal note, being involved with showing my own dogs and knowing people in the FCR world here and abroad. I know just how many people are telling me about the death of their FCR at a premature age from Thyroid tumors, Osteosarcoma and Hamangiosarcoma. Kidney failure, Crippling Arthritic problems and all dying at ages prior to 9years old. The Trending I’m seeing from interested parties who call looking for a breeder to replace the loss of one of their companions is hovering around 6 years old. And one recent “client” lost their FCR at age 3 due to a heart attack. The FCR dogs in real life I hear about exceeding 9years old is few and far between by comparison to the numbers dying early on. It really doesn’t take a lot of effort to see the trending. If you believe otherwise you must be joking here.
The work to fix the problems weighs heavy on the dog fancy to revise their methods and thinking. And ...

As for the cost of the dogs that do come up yellow….. They cost the same as a black or liver, to charge anything more would be unethical. The color variant is as common as it is for the Labrador. The difference today is that its constantly bred away from using DNA information to do so. And with this information a very genetically savvy breeder can and often does use a carrier of yellow to still produce litters of only black and liver pups. I use the same information to include this in the FCR population and make sure IT NEVER GOES AWAY.

Again repeating myself for those who flame on before reading….
“My husband has a career. He is a very successful person in his industry of choice. And with his income my family does not ever need to make a living off of breeding dogs. In fact since we couldn't. It is therefore a research hobby and our way to make a positive contribution. since 2004 we've only had a single litter of FCR and 5 litters of Hybrids. certainly not enough to make a living off of them, if anything our veterinary bills and feeding costs eat up a third of that and ..... what's left is nothing by comparison to what my husband's salary is.”

Let me translate for the apparent language barrier issues here from American to British. This means he makes a LOT of bloody money. Spelled like this in American $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ ;-)

no one said you made a profit from breeding, dont put words in our mouths. But a profit from breeding is something MOST breeders will make, let it be on one litter or all. and what the heck does the money made on breeding have to do with the money your husband brings in I would guess most breeders that work bring in more a year than they would make from one litter. .. and even if they didnt, what does it prove lol.

Just wanted to put an end to those that think we are in it for money or commercial breeders. That is all.

Do you know what I find difficult to swallow?

You're so against purebreeds and closed gene pools, yet you're aiming to create a new breed yourself?????

Also, if we all out crossed to make dogs healthier (which seems to be what you believe), then breeds wouldn't exist, which means you'd have no income as no one would want/be able to buy your "designer breed"?

:? :? :?

(sigh) again I repeat myself..from an earlier post.

"The fact that our "designer dogs" (the preferred term is hybrid) are New....Well what are you comparing them to? The FCR? Again... read your histories. FCR are in fact another hybrid dog experiment. Unless you deny they were crossed then out crossed and backcrossed to begin with. Our Breeds today, with the exception of a few pariah breeds, were all created from crossing other breeds. If you check the stud books from your very own registries you can learn this for yourself. These weren't types, they were other breeds. All of our pure breeds today were considered mongrels before the studs books lowered the boom with a closed registry system. Why continue to deny that?"

Did it ever occur to anyone here that the creation of our dogs breeds prior to the closed stud books and registries taking their toll produced genetically superior canines from the onset and that over time because of the imposed restrictions of the closed registries what we have now are hovering on diversity factors equivalent to many endangered species.

Really, its like slapping us in the face. Learning from our mistakes seems to take a very long time to absorb.

Oh Well

(sigh)

And by the way, the hybrids today are as popular if not more popular than the purbred dogs. Let me look again..... Yup they are.

Therfore most people don't give a rats ass about the purity. They do care about the long term health. That's ultimately the best return on any investment, getting the most out of it in return.

That doesn't answer my questions!

(sigh)


It appears to me, regardless of what you say, that you are breeding to supply the pet market. The problem people on here have with that is:

A] There are already enough ethically bred pure bred dogs to supply the market (by ethical I mean breeding to better the breed) without unethical people like yourself (by unethical I mean breeding to further your own ego or line your own pockets eg creating a designer breed or cross breed and selling for silly amouts of money or breeding rare colours again selling for silly amounts of money) adding unnecessarily to their numbers

B] People that go in search of the latest fashion or rareity are almost certain to lose interest very quickly once the novelty wears off. Once the novelty wears off the dog inevitably ends up being dumped, neglected or rehomed/in a rescue centre.

The main problem with the above scenarios is that it is of course cruel to the dogs produced. Of course no one can guarantee a puppy won't end up in a rescue centre, but those who breed with the breeds best interests at heart (eg not breeding lines too close, breeding to better the breed through work or show, fully health testing the parents etc) are far more likely to find better homes for their pups than someone who doesn't give a monkeys and just holds their hand out waiting for the cash.

Also as I understand it, dogs as a species have a closed gene pool as they all originated from the same ancestor, as did all life forms on Earth, so although crossing out to different breeds may appear to create healthier animals in the first instance, you are infact breeding with in the same gene pool on the whole anyway.

I have no doubt you will reply with some completely unrelated facts about pure breed dogs and their comparison in popularity to cross breeds, but hey ho - it is always worth a try eh?!

Again firing off bullets based on what. Stereotypes you pin on people who don't see eye to eye with your own ideologies. You really need to take a walk and let off the steam.

The Duck Tolling and the Boykin and the Xsolos, Cane Corso, Murray River Curlies etc etc are all relatively new breeds. Why not A Chatham Hill Retriever. Does it offend you for some one to take that on? I wonder what our ancestors went through in the creation of their dogs. You don't think these new breeds or any existing breed just appeared one day through divine intervention do you? They were created by the very means you seem to take issue with. They were created from crossing other dogs. Therefore, its safe to say that the future of dogs is still evolving. I love the pure bred histories of many dogs, I despise the creation of some Fad breeds with awful breed characteristics that are more harmful than good. But the history behind many is also intriguing.

Does that answer your question?

I'm not here to convince you or anyone else about your choices made as being detrimental to the pure breeds. If you're a part of the circles within the dog fancy then you already helped convinced the public about that, I have no work to do in that regard.

YES!!! THE PET MARKET. Because believe it or not that is what drives the demands for more of all our dogs. THE PET MARKET is what requires a longer living healthier companion. And ultimately the pet populations may even be the saving grace for many pure breeds in need of a shot in the arm for diversity.

Your Viszla are actually a good choice for a possible outcross to help diversify the gene pool for the FCR. Its actually already in the planning from our perspective using Long Haired Vizsla. Along with some Black German Short hair Pointer and Long haired Weimaraner. The possibilities are endless. But the results will likely be in a better place than the parents genetically.

*** I don't know what the situation is like as far as diversity for your Hungarian WireHaired Vizsla. But, I'm going to guess that with a small breeding population and possibly 380 dogs registered annually in the British KC, I'm willing to bet the Diversity for the breed is about on par with the Goldens or FCR for that matter, if there has been a fair amount of the status quo practice of close line breeding, a small founding population, same sire effect and again... the closed registry to help keep it going****

We've seen what the status quo's idea of ethical breeding has brought the situation of our pure breeds. I think along with a demanding public, that its time to look elsewhere since for the generations the efforts of the staus quo have done more damage than good for dogdom.

Its also evident the Hybrid "Novelty" as you say it has eclipsed the Pure bred dog fancy for the moment. And during this time it would be an excellent opportunity for the Purists to fix the problems they actually caused by revising their methods and ultimately using the distraction afforded them by the high demand for "designer dogs". To start doing things that are truly beneficial for their chosen breeds.

Here I repeat myself again for those who have not read previous posts...

"If I were breeding to supply the Show and Trial markets it would be a really sad road to travel by continuing the current practices of Line breeding and inbreeding."

Again my point here isn't that its my job to convince you and your circle of friends here that what practices you condone are wrong.

It's your job to convince the public that those practices in light of modern scientific evidence is right.

And since the light is now shining on you and yours. Its time to show the majority public where I stand that even with all the damning proof against you and yours. That continuing to do things according to the status quo is somehow going to magically reverse the damage done.

Good luck with that.

In about two decades let me know how that went for you. :-D

I have rejoined this forum,entirely because of this thread. I couldn't stand by and watch this happening on a thread aboout a breed I love and adore.

First, I like yellows, I would happily have a yellow, but a yellow should never, as has been suggested on here, look like a Golden retriever. It should look like what it is...a yellow Flat Coated Retriever. Flat Coated Retrievers do not look or act like Golden Retrievers, they are two distinct breeds and should frankly stay that way. I have Flat Coats because they look and act like Flat Coats. A yellow FCR that looks like a GR is a poorly bred yellow FCR in my opinion. Whilst yes, we have been asked if my (black)_FCR is a GR...that was from someone who knew very little about dog breeds and had never encountered a FCR before...

Second... I sourced my puppy carefully. The breeder of my boy still has his mum (10) and his gran (13) living with her and is in touch with the owners of their siblings, given she bred them. I am fortunate enough to know many FCR breeders and whilst yes, sadly,cancer is something that happens in the breed, I wouldn't say that more dogs die young of cancer than live to a ripe old age. Yes, the stats aren't good...but people in the breed in this country are working exceptionally hard to improve things. Indeed the tumour survey, run by the FCRS is and will show up allsorts of things. My girl had a malignant lump examined by them after removal this year, free of charge. Paid for by the survey organisers and analysed, along with a blood sample at Cambridge. Personally I would rather see people invest more in schemes like that than breeding in a fault that has not been proven to be beneficial to the breed in any way shape or form, indeed to breed specifically to get yellows is narrowing the gene pool further.

You didn't actually answer my question about whether you show...are your dogs actually great examples of the breed? Do you work them, are they 'fit for function?' Again it was important to me that the dual nature of my breed had been considered by the breeder of my pup...one of his siblings is a gamekeepers dog and the breeder regularly goes picking up. Do you do that with your dogs?

As for a 'Chatham Hill Retriever'...get real and come off your high horse. How arrogant. To assume you can play God and create a new breed...you know what there are dogs bursting out of the rescue centres. I am currently involved with trying to get a specific dog out of a shelter where we have been told he still has 'a bit of time' because they will PTS the old dogs first...and there's you, creating a new breed! To do what exactly...are your dogs that good at working that people want your dogs to go work with? Is there a demand for your dogs on the field? I suspect not...people will still use dogs that were bred for a specific purpose, not to nurture someones ego.

As I say, I have come back onto this forum and had my account reactivated because I do not want a thread like this happening about a breed I am dedicated to. I am not a breeder and will never be a breeder as I could not bare the responsibility, but I am in contact with several, reputable and amazing breeders who are working their socks off to improve the health of this amazing breed...whilst maintaining their their temperament, working ability and looks. I dont' see you doing any of that...just massaging your own ego and limiting a gene pool further...I suspect many reputable breeders in the States and Canada won't let you go anywhere near their dogs so that you can breed in fresh lines.