# GWH Pointer x Lab wanted please!



## Faye625 (20 May 2013)

In the West Midlands area. Please let me know if you know of any litters! Thanks


----------



## s4sugar (20 May 2013)

Why? Why would anyone do this cross & why would you want one?


----------



## Faye625 (20 May 2013)

I know a few people who own them and they are lovely dogs. Thanks for your constructive and helpful comment!


----------



## competitiondiva (20 May 2013)

Not wire haired sorry, these are gsp x lab: http://www.epupz.co.uk/clas/viewdetails.asp?view=525825


----------



## Nikki J (20 May 2013)

s4sugar said:



			Why? Why would anyone do this cross & why would you want one?
		
Click to expand...


Why why??!!  They are FABULOUS dogs.  I had a chocolate lab crossed GSP in the late 70's - Jakey - and she was an absolute cracker!!


----------



## s4sugar (20 May 2013)

Faye625 said:



			I know a few people who own them and they are lovely dogs. Thanks for your constructive and helpful comment!
		
Click to expand...

The two breeds have different working styles and if you had a good bitch of either why would you breed crosses from her?

They may well be lovely dogs, few dogs are not lovely, but no reason to do this cross. What is wrong with either breed?


----------



## Faye625 (20 May 2013)

I'm not debating with you about why I like them. I didn't personally decide to mix the two breeds, in fact I wouldn't of thought to put them together if I hadn't of seen one, but I just happened to take a liking the few that I have been introduced to so I would like one myself.


----------



## lexiedhb (20 May 2013)

I think WHY is a totally fair question. Breeding mongrels is unpredictable. No two litters will be the same, so saying that you "have seen one/two etc and they are fabulous dogs" does nothing to guarantee the one you pick up will be of a similar nature.

I also assume you meant to add to your post "from fully health tested parents"- to the want for a litter


----------



## Faye625 (20 May 2013)

And what makes you think that I won't look for these things once I have actually found a litter? I work at a vets full time so I am well aware of checks that need to be done and paperwork that should be present. Now if you wouldn't mind could you remove your opiniated self from my post and while your at it try dismounting your high horse too.


----------



## s4sugar (20 May 2013)

You still haven't answered why? & why not a pure breed - whatever breed?


----------



## Spudlet (20 May 2013)

Here's a GSP x lab needing a home - nice looking dog. Have to say I've only met one such dog, and he was a handful and a half! But if you are sure want one, why not consider a rescue?

ETA to add link! D'oh http://gsprescuesw.freeforums.org/leroy-black-gsp-x-labrador-3-yrs-male-eire-available-t703.html


----------



## Faye625 (20 May 2013)

I posted something on here for peoples help/advice and instead get people like yourself barrage me and try to imply that I am doing wrong when I most definitely am not. So if you know of no litters then please stop replying as you'll be talking to yourself from now on. Muchos Gracias.


----------



## s4sugar (20 May 2013)

I actually know a lot of people with both breeds. Show and working.

They would be horrified at the thought of crossing them. I'm sure you will find a puppy farmer to produce one for you - good luck with it & spare a thought for the rest of us that pick up the pieces after irresponsible breeding.


----------



## gunnergundog (20 May 2013)

If you work at a vets and have done your homework you will know that there was a vWD carrier GWP dog imported into the UK last year which allegedly is being used for breeding.  Noone with a pedigree bitch would use it so I can only imagine that it will be siring puppy farm/back yard breeder type litters, such as you are seeking.

OP,......I hope you have sufficient funds to cope with any emergencies relating to vWD and of course are prepared emotionally to potentially lose your dog in sad circumstances. Oh, and also remember that vWD goes hand in hand with hypothyroid in many circumstances.  I doubt you would get insurance on these aspects, but maybe, working at a vets you can get a discount.


----------



## GeeGeeboy (20 May 2013)

Oh dearly me!


----------



## CAYLA (21 May 2013)

See some may see these posts as rude but i do think it educates alot of people looking in on the threads esp those wanting to avoid funding the indescriminate breeding market. but tgen there is spudlets post aswell highlightin u can save your money and get a x breed mongrel from.rescue as it should b perfect for y the op if ots the x you want.....i have to say a rescue is the only place i would take a x breed from, leave the purchase of pups to those doing their home work and the result of a health testing responsible breeder.


----------



## CAYLA (21 May 2013)

Sorry re typos on phone, fat finger alert lol


----------



## whisp&willow (21 May 2013)

Well said Cayla.  (well almost! ) x


----------



## lexiedhb (21 May 2013)

Faye625 said:



			And what makes you think that I won't look for these things once I have actually found a litter? I work at a vets full time so I am well aware of checks that need to be done and paperwork that should be present. Now if you wouldn't mind could you remove your opiniated self from my post and while your at it try dismounting your high horse too.
		
Click to expand...

Then you would know that all these tests should be done PRIOR to a litter being born- what health tests exactly would you be looking for?

No need for rudeness- noone has been rude to you- just questioning why you would want to fuel the mongrel breeding that is so very unnecessary when there are thousands of dogs in rescue needing homes.


----------



## CAYLA (21 May 2013)

whisp&willow said:



			Well said Cayla.  (well almost! ) x
		
Click to expand...

cheeky


----------



## Cinnamontoast (21 May 2013)

Agree with Cayla. 

Much*a*s gracias. Can you tell I need to go back to work?!

The trouble is, that crossing two breeds means you just do not know what you're going to get. Within a purebred litter, you're going to get very varied temperaments, I'm on my second pair of siblings and the pairs have been extremely different. Crossing breeds means potentially huge differences.

It's is a bit of a bugbear of mine in that it's only sensible to gauge a forum before you dive in. Many people on here work in rescue and have seen badly bred and unwanted pups with no health testing and huge issues. As a specialist dog section, it's to be expected that some of us get concerned at random crosses being requested.


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

s4sugar said:



			The two breeds have different working styles and if you had a good bitch of either why would you breed crosses from her?

They may well be lovely dogs, few dogs are not lovely, but no reason to do this cross. What is wrong with either breed?
		
Click to expand...

As someone who has never experienced anything but poor health from her pedigree dogs, and nothing but good health from her crossbreeds, I am very much in favour of good crosses.  My Jakey was an absolutely splendid dog and lived to an old age.  We rescued her at 5 years old, and she was a house pet, not a working dog, although she became a very good retriever for my then husband.

I dislike intensely this snobbish attitude towards crossbreeds - the number of times I have suffered sneering remarks about my 2 gorgeous boys - "oh, what a shame they are mongrels not pedigrees"  What!!  Why!!  wtf is THAT all about.  Either you love them, think them gorgeous, healthy fit dogs or not.  Yes, my boys are mongrels - and I am proud that they are such and not inbred pedigrees.  ALL pedigree dogs - you only have to look in their pedigrees - are inbred and close bred.  My pedigree GSP Lizzie was a Wittekind.  Oooh, exclaimed all the GSP experts, that's good, She's a Wittekind - what excellent lines she has, you should breed from her.  However, on looking at her pedigree her father - Wittekind Gregory - was also her mate's grandfather.  This is just plain madness.  It is illegal for humans to marry their cousins even, for extremely good and sound medical reasons, but this is an even closer relationship than cousins!  I cannot quite work out what it is, but it is damned close.  And this close relationship was featured going back on both maternal and paternal sides of Lizzie's pedigree AND her mate's as well!  So they were very closely related.  I am a believer in hybrid vigour, and whereas of course like everyone else I know of many extremely healthy pedigrees, I personally have never experienced owning one - all my pedigrees have been very UNhealthy - either mentally or physically.


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			ALL pedigree dogs - you only have to look in their pedigrees - are inbred and close bred.  

It is illegal for humans to marry their cousins even
		
Click to expand...

Both these statements are bunkum, sorry. I look at a good deal of pedigrees 
And it is legal to marry your first cousin in the UK if you so wish.
Even the Royal Family do it....

But don't let the fact get in the way of a good rant


----------



## lexiedhb (21 May 2013)

My boy is a mongrel-  does not mean I have to agree with breeding them willy nilly and giving them daft "designer" names, with no thought to health/temperament testing!! Just because someone wants to make a quick buck, or someone knows someone who has one and so they want one- just like that - especially when there are thousands upon thousands of mongrels from pup to old age in rescue requiring homes!


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			Both these statements are bunkum, sorry. I look at a good deal of pedigrees 
And it is legal to marry your first cousin in the UK if you so wish.
Even the Royal Family do it....

But don't let the fact get in the way of a good rant 

Click to expand...

Oops - OK, got that wrong - my apologies - but don't split hairs!!  You have not explained to me why it is perfectly OK for my bitch to have Wittekind Gregory as her father, but on her maternal side, as her grandfather!!  I am damned sure this would not be allowed in this country!!

Are you telling me that it is OK to interbreed - it's worse than inbreeding - our dogs in this way?  Did you not see that programme about Crufts - Mark Evans - and hear his statement about a parade of mutants?

Are you telling me that I am lying about Lizzie's pedigree.  I still have it at home, although she died almost 30 years ago.  She was the last pedigree I had - never again, with the possible exception of an Alaskan Malamute but I would not pay good money for one, I would only ever have one as a rescue.  Ditto Czech wolfdog or Saarloos.


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

lexiedhb said:



			My boy is a mongrel-  does not mean I have to agree with breeding them willy nilly and giving them daft "designer" names, with no thought to health/temperament testing!! Just because someone wants to make a quick buck, or someone knows someone who has one and so they want one- just like that - especially when there are thousands upon thousands of mongrels from pup to old age in rescue requiring homes!
		
Click to expand...

I could not agree more.  But whoever mentioned such dire practices.  You are right, this goes on - particularly amongst my choice of type, wolfie types.  But I have friends on northern breed crosses who adhere to the strictest programme of health testing - hips, elbows, eyes, Addisons, Von Willebrand - probably more, but I can't remember all the names.

Nothing wrong with breeding any type of dog - with or without daft designer names - one of my boys is a registered Utonagan, don't see anything wrong with that btw, it's a lovely name - as long as good breeding practice is observed.  The aforementioned, PLUS NO INTER OR INBREEDING.  That is a disgusting practice and frankly IMO should be made illegal.


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

No I am not accusing you of lying and I thought the Pedigree Dogs programme was sensationalist toot which has done more harm than good and sent people running into the arms of puppy farmers and backyard breeders in their droves and has made every randomer an instant 'expert' on my breed and many others. 

Linebreeding done knowledgeably and to improve on known traits is not a bad thing IMO.
You just have to know what you are doing. The same with outcrossing and wild card breedings. 

I've had many, many pedigrees all who have lived to old age except two from the same litter who were linebred to two dogs known for skin allergies/ear issues.
All I have to do is avoid those lines, research more and choose more wisely in future. I couldn't do that unless I had pedigrees to look at.
My own young dog has no common anscestors in five generations.


There are plenty of people on here with unhealthy crossbreeds (hip and elbow problems, allergies etc).


----------



## lexiedhb (21 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			I could not agree more.  But whoever mentioned such dire practices.  You are right, this goes on - particularly amongst my choice of type, wolfie types.  But I have friends on northern breed crosses who adhere to the strictest programme of health testing - hips, elbows, eyes, Addisons, Von Willebrand - probably more, but I can't remember all the names.

Nothing wrong with breeding any type of dog - with or without daft designer names - one of my boys is a registered Utonagan, don't see anything wrong with that btw, it's a lovely name - as long as good breeding practice is observed.  The aforementioned, PLUS NO INTER OR INBREEDING.  That is a disgusting practice and frankly IMO should be made illegal.
		
Click to expand...

Problem is- inter breeding IS happening now with the crosses. Ex family member decided to get a dog- decided the Labradoodle was the dog for her, told me it was going to be "third" generation- EH? says i . Meaning Labradoodles crossed with labradoodles- right i say. Yeah the breeder assured her that the genetics of his lines are far enough away that health should not be a problem- WHY? because there was inbreeding going on - tis not the curse of a few pedigree lines anymore Im afraid!


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			No I am not accusing you of lying and I thought the Pedigree Dogs programme was sensationalist toot which has done more harm than good and sent people running into the arms of puppy farmers and backyard breeders in their droves and has made every randomer an instant 'expert' on my breed and many others. 

Linebreeding done knowledgeably and to improve on known traits is not a bad thing IMO.
You just have to know what you are doing. The same with outcrossing and wild card breedings. 

I've had many, many pedigrees all who have lived to old age except two from the same litter who were linebred to two dogs known for skin allergies/ear issues.
All I have to do is avoid those lines, research more and choose more wisely in future. I couldn't do that unless I had pedigrees to look at.
My own young dog has no common anscestors in five generations.


There are plenty of people on here with unhealthy crossbreeds (hip and elbow problems, allergies etc).
		
Click to expand...

Great news that your young dog has no common ancestors in 5 generations.  That's good - do I take it then that things are improving in the pedigree world?  I freely admit that my Lizzie's pedigree - which I will attempt to scan in at home tonight and see if I can paste it on here - is 30 years old nearly.

I too know unhealthy crossbreeds, and I know of healthy pedigrees, one can never generalise, all one can do IMO is be sensible.

I thought that Mark Evans did an amazing job to bring to the attention of both doggie and non doggie people the appalling things that we have done to man's best friend in the interests of fashion.  Look what we have done to the Cavalier?  Look at many, if not the majority, of GSDs with their roach backs and fallen haunches.  Our next door neighbour's GSD is a perfect example of this - he is only 6 or 7 and he can no longer jump into the back of the car, or get up or down the stairs!!  AND they paid a fortune for him from a very reputable and well known breeder of supposedly healthy GSDs!!

Ben and Tai cost me nothing - well, Tai cost me £100 in that I made a donation to the lady who took him in to rehome him. 

Let us hope that what you are telling me about your 5 generations of no close breeding is, or is becoming, the norm now.  I think we have that programme by Mark Evans at least partially to thank for this, so don't knock it!


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

lexiedhb said:



			Problem is- inter breeding IS happening now with the crosses. Ex family member decided to get a dog- decided the Labradoodle was the dog for her, told me it was going to be "third" generation- EH? says i . Meaning Labradoodles crossed with labradoodles- right i say. Yeah the breeder assured her that the genetics of his lines are far enough away that health should not be a problem- WHY? because there was inbreeding going on - tis not the curse of a few pedigree lines anymore Im afraid!
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree, which is sad and tragic.  But this has been going on in the pedigree world for almost a century, with no-one turning a hair ... until THAT PROGRAMME!!

In and interbreeding can only ever be bad - to my mind, there can NEVER be any justification to mating father with daughter, mother to son, sister to brother, and yet it goes on the whole time in virtually every breed.  Or is it starting to wane now, I do hope so.


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

Must get back to my work now, but just an idle google found this:

Question
I hope you can help me . Im female and I am currently in a relationship with my cousin (who is my dads brother's son)  and we are planning to get married. 

The problem is my mum and dad are also cousins on the same side of the family. We are worried that when it comes to having children there will be problems. 

Can you help, as I dont know where else to turn?

*Answer
I am quite amazed by your email. But I take it that you are genuinely serious about this relationship. You see, if your mum and dad are cousins - as well as you and your boyfriend - I'm afraid that the amount of inbreeding that is involved here is breathtaking. 

I've just made myself a little sketch of your very complex family tree, and it's clear that you and your boyfriend share two grandparents and four great-grandparents. And you yourself have only got SIX great-grandparents - instead of the usual eight. 

Such a marriage would be legal, but I'm afraid that the chance of having abnormal babies would be high. *


Read more: http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/ate/sexandrelationships/familyproblems/200403.html#ixzz2Tvbid54l 
Follow us: @NetDoctor on Twitter | NetDoctorUK on Facebook

The doctor's answer says it all!!


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

Well you see, I am informed by what I actually look at in front of my own eyes, like lots of dogs (working away, with no problems), lots of paper pedigrees (not one, that's 30 years old), lots of online pedigrees, talking to lots of people, reading lots of books, what I see at dog shows or out on the training field and in competition (I really don't see very many of these 'majority of GSDs with roached backs and fallen haunches - they wouldn't really be very useful for police, security work or competition) not relying on TV programmes, one neighbours' dog, or hearsay.

You know that the Germanic/progressive GSD community in the UK were the ones who started the hip scoring scheme off their own bat for the betterment of the breed, right?
Nasty nasty pedigree dog breeders...


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			Absolutely agree, which is sad and tragic.  But this has been going on in the pedigree world for almost a century, with no-one turning a hair ... until THAT PROGRAMME!!=
		
Click to expand...

Bunkum, again.


----------



## s4sugar (21 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			Absolutely agree, which is sad and tragic.  But this has been going on in the pedigree world for almost a century, with no-one turning a hair ... until THAT PROGRAMME!!

In and interbreeding can only ever be bad - to my mind, there can NEVER be any justification to mating father with daughter, mother to son, sister to brother, and yet it goes on the whole time in virtually every breed.  Or is it starting to wane now, I do hope so.
		
Click to expand...

Interbreeding is what you are asking for - it means crossbreeding!
 In breeding is the name given to mating of close relatives and such matings are not allowed by the kennel club. 

It is quite nornal to have one name of both sides of a pedigree as long as they are  grandparents or further back as long as the common name is outstanding and healthy it can be a good thing. Inbreeding co-efficients don't take quality or multiple duplications into account so are a tool and not an absolute guide.  All too often inbreeding is done not for selection but for convenience or to save money or travel.   

That programme was challenged and proved inaccurate in court but perhaps you might like to contact the producer -she supports a "rescue" that ships in black labrador crosses from pounds in Ireland. As if we didn't have enough dogs PTS daily in UK pounds.


----------



## galaxy (21 May 2013)

It is very easy to find a GSP that is not inbred.  My one isn't for starters!  I looked at the coefficient tool on KC website ages ago (when it first came out) and it was very low (can't remember what it was now) and well below the published "safe" percentage.

There are so many tools you can use now when researching a potential pup to make sure it is not inbred and from health tested parents.  Just a couple of clicks of a button.

There is a drive to make people do the research and for breeders to do things responsibly.  I personally so not see WHY someone with a German Pointer would cross breed it (I would say the same for Labs, but I know this is a breed that has been crossed a lot  - sadly - IMO).  I do not see the purpose/function.  It can't even be for money as the price of the X pups linked on this page are about a 1/4 of what a German Pointer would go for! So can only imagine it's a mistake that wasn't dealt with.....


----------



## Cinnamontoast (21 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			Both these statements are bunkum, sorry. I look at a good deal of pedigrees 
And it is legal to marry your first cousin in the UK if you so wish.
Even the Royal Family do it....

But don't let the fact get in the way of a good rant 

Click to expand...

Pmsl! 

The amount of people swayed by that ridiculous sensationalist programme is astonishing!

The only way to guarantee healthy dogs is to health test the parents and to not breed randomly or to breed indiscriminately. Mongrels are NOT necessarily healthier than pedigrees. Hybrid vigour, I'm afraid, is just a myth.


----------



## Amymay (21 May 2013)

I get soooo confused by all this cross breeding discussion.

All breeds are a result of cross breeding at some point.  And whilst I agree we shouldn't be looking for the arbitrary breeding of just any old dog just for the sake of it.  Is it really such a 'no' 'no'??


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

If the parents are health tested and/or are being bred for a purpose/function other than to just make money then I have less of an issue with it. But I still have a bit of an issue with it.

There are hundreds of breeds of dogs for all purposes, there are thousands of crosses and mongrels in rescue waiting for homes, countless OOPS litters, which would make perfectly serviceable pets, I can't seem to see the point in deliberately creating more.

Well bred dogs and nice family dogs with good natures, and healthy dogs, are not mutually exclusive in my experience.


----------



## blackcob (21 May 2013)

10 month old pointer cross in rescue:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Morgans-Dog-Rescue/244076885635414


----------



## Amymay (21 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			If the parents are health tested and/or are being bred for a purpose/function other than to just make money then I have less of an issue with it. But I still have a bit of an issue with it.

There are hundreds of breeds of dogs for all purposes, there are thousands of crosses and mongrels in rescue waiting for homes, countless OOPS litters, which would make perfectly serviceable pets, I can't seem to see the point in deliberately creating more.

Well bred dogs and nice family dogs with good natures, and healthy dogs, are not mutually exclusive in my experience.
		
Click to expand...

No, I absolutely take your point on all the above.  

I do think it's an interesting debate though, especially as ALL of our dogs are the result of cross breeding.


----------



## s4sugar (21 May 2013)

amymay said:



			No, I absolutely take your point on all the above.  

I do think it's an interesting debate though, especially as ALL of our dogs are the result of cross breeding.
		
Click to expand...

Not all -some are from landrace strains and some are from selection within a type.


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

Well in 1895, there was a need for a dog like, for example, a GSD and we didn't have a glut of unwanted dogs, overflowing rescues and there were no backyard breeders, or free ad sites.


----------



## Amymay (21 May 2013)

s4sugar said:



			Not all -some are from landrace strains and some are from selection within a type.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely no idea what that means....


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			Well you see, I am informed by what I actually look at in front of my own eyes, like lots of dogs (working away, with no problems), lots of paper pedigrees (not one, that's 30 years old), lots of online pedigrees, talking to lots of people, reading lots of books, what I see at dog shows or out on the training field and in competition (I really don't see very many of these 'majority of GSDs with roached backs and fallen haunches - they wouldn't really be very useful for police, security work or competition) not relying on TV programmes, one neighbours' dog, or hearsay.

You know that the Germanic/progressive GSD community in the UK were the ones who started the hip scoring scheme off their own bat for the betterment of the breed, right?
Nasty nasty pedigree dog breeders...
		
Click to expand...

Actually, I know of many more GSDs than just our next door neighbours!!  they are after all the most popular breed!!  Just in our tiny tiny village alone, we have 7 - 2 of whom belong to someone who is heavily involved with a local GSD training club of some repute.  His current 2, their predecessors, and their predecessors ALL were roached backed, with hip dysplasia, and did not live to double figures.  With 1 exception - 25 years ago when we moved to the village, he had one entire male GSD who was magnificent, the biggest GSD I have ever seen and was at absolute darling.  He was a perfect specimen, no roach, no fallen haunches, no hip dysplasia and he lived well into double figures.

I too am out and about - not so much at dog shows, although I do attend some because my daughter likes to show her chihuahuas - but just generally out and about in the countryside and meet many GSDs - round us they are the most popular of breeds, and I have to say that with the exception of the old boy I have mentioned above, none seem to have nice straight backs and all who are above the age of 5 or 6 clearly are struggling to walk.

I am not talking about police dogs, I used to work for our local police force and my office happened to overlook the training yard and kennels area.  Those dogs I must admit looked far better physical specimens, however, they were all young of course.


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

s4sugar said:



			Interbreeding is what you are asking for - it means crossbreeding!
 In breeding is the name given to mating of close relatives and such matings are not allowed by the kennel club. 

It is quite nornal to have one name of both sides of a pedigree as long as they are  grandparents or further back as long as the common name is outstanding and healthy it can be a good thing. Inbreeding co-efficients don't take quality or multiple duplications into account so are a tool and not an absolute guide.  All too often inbreeding is done not for selection but for convenience or to save money or travel.   

That programme was challenged and proved inaccurate in court but perhaps you might like to contact the producer -she supports a "rescue" that ships in black labrador crosses from pounds in Ireland. As if we didn't have enough dogs PTS daily in UK pounds.
		
Click to expand...

You don't need to teach me about the english language, thanx!  I've been dealing quite well with it now for nearly 60 years without too many mishaps!  I am fully aware of the difference between in-breeding and inter-breeding.  If in-breeding is not allowed by the KC, then they had better see the pedigrees of some of my friends' dogs.  Are you sure about this?

I'm sorry, but no-one seems to be able to answer this question for me.  why is it perfectly OK to inbreed dogs, but not humans?  We are animals too of the mammalian species.  Would you like to be the result of your father mating with your husband's grandmother, or even great-grandmother, making you and your husband pretty closely related!!  It is disgusting, apart from being completely undesirable.  Did you not read that posting of what the medics think of such practice?


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

Are you self-diagnosing the hip dysplasia or have you seen all the x-ray plates and score sheets? 

Anyway, you sound very unlucky in your experiences with the breed but it sounds like they are all related to the same breeder if they are all from your local area (your tiny village, out and about in the countryside/in your area - your words)? What training club? PM me if you prefer. Although they can't have been that unhealthy or unsound if they were actively training in a club of some repute


----------



## galaxy (21 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			.  If in-breeding is not allowed by the KC, then they had better see the pedigrees of some of my friends' dogs.  Are you sure about this?
		
Click to expand...

"Will the Kennel Club ban the mating of close relatives that have not already been banned?

The Kennel Club will not register the progeny from the mating of immediate close relatives (mother/son, father/daughter and sibling matings) as it considered that the risk to genetic diversity from these matings is too high.

It did not issue a blanket ban on the registration of progeny from the mating of second degree relatives, for example grandfather/granddaughter matings, because it fears that this could be counterproductive in some cases. Every breed and every dog must have a different breeding plan. It would be counterproductive to refuse to register a puppy produced from the mating of two entirely healthy dogs that may be second degree relatives in a breed with a very small population, as these will still produce healthy puppies. This is much more favourable than allowing the mating of two more distant relatives that have health issues. The Mate Select tool enables breeders to manage these various considerations for the overall benefit of the breed.
"

from http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/3723

Personally I think it could go further, but then as a buyer, you can just do research and choose a litter with a very low coefficient.


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

galaxy said:



			It is very easy to find a GSP that is not inbred.  My one isn't for starters!  I looked at the coefficient tool on KC website ages ago (when it first came out) and it was very low (can't remember what it was now) and well below the published "safe" percentage.

There are so many tools you can use now when researching a potential pup to make sure it is not inbred and from health tested parents.  Just a couple of clicks of a button.

There is a drive to make people do the research and for breeders to do things responsibly.  I personally so not see WHY someone with a German Pointer would cross breed it (I would say the same for Labs, but I know this is a breed that has been crossed a lot  - sadly - IMO).  I do not see the purpose/function.  It can't even be for money as the price of the X pups linked on this page are about a 1/4 of what a German Pointer would go for! So can only imagine it's a mistake that wasn't dealt with.....
		
Click to expand...

Glad to hear about your GSD, sounds great!!  But I fail to understand, I really do, why it should be so wrong to crossbreed!!  Crossbred dogs can and are health checked and can cost a lot of money.  A utonagan like my boy will set you back £500.  They are a wonderful breed and I know of at least 3 very ethical breeders who breed magnificent dogs.

All breeds were crossbred at one time.  The wolf was the original ancestor of the dog - so all dogs are wolf crossbreeds effectively!!


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

galaxy said:



			"Will the Kennel Club ban the mating of close relatives that have not already been banned?

The Kennel Club will not register the progeny from the mating of immediate close relatives (mother/son, father/daughter and sibling matings) as it considered that the risk to genetic diversity from these matings is too high.

It did not issue a blanket ban on the registration of progeny from the mating of second degree relatives, for example grandfather/granddaughter matings, because it fears that this could be counterproductive in some cases. Every breed and every dog must have a different breeding plan. It would be counterproductive to refuse to register a puppy produced from the mating of two entirely healthy dogs that may be second degree relatives in a breed with a very small population, as these will still produce healthy puppies. This is much more favourable than allowing the mating of two more distant relatives that have health issues. The Mate Select tool enables breeders to manage these various considerations for the overall benefit of the breed.
"

from http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/3723

Personally I think it could go further, but then as a buyer, you can just do research and choose a litter with a very low coefficient.
		
Click to expand...

Well, this is an excellent start.  Hopefully grandparent/grandchild matings will be banned too.  It is illegal for humans to do such matings with very good reasons.  It should be no different for man's best friend.


----------



## galaxy (21 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			Well, this is an excellent start.  Hopefully grandparent/grandchild matings will be banned too.  It is illegal for humans to do such matings with very good reasons.  It should be no different for man's best friend.
		
Click to expand...

It's very unwise to do it from my experience.  But then it's not just dogs....  My old horse was inbred.  his great grandfather on one side was his grandfather on the other.  And the result was that his private parts were deformed (I won't get graphic!)  He had to undergo unecessary operations but did go on to live a happy normal life.  The breeder didn't do it again though!!!!

and cats......  well I've seen they are definitely not fussy by choice!!!!!  Inbred hussies


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			Are you self-diagnosing the hip dysplasia or have you seen all the x-ray plates and score sheets? 

Anyway, you sound very unlucky in your experiences with the breed but it sounds like they are all related to the same breeder if they are all from your local area (your tiny village, out and about in the countryside/in your area - your words)? What training club? PM me if you prefer. Although they can't have been that unhealthy or unsound if they were actively training in a club of some repute 

Click to expand...


Of course not!!  How can you diagnose hip dysplasia looking at a dog?  This is from talking to the owners - not just in our tiny village, but all over the countryside.  We met a lovely couple in Norfolk on holiday with a lovely young GSD bitch who had been diagnosed with dysplasia.  She was only 4 and was virtually a cripple.  She had cost them a lot of money as she was supposedly from good stock.  I am a very cynical old buzzard I'm afraid.

And no, I am not prepared to say the name of the training club. It is a large, well known club of some repute and the chap .  They have enough to cope with having to lift their large dog in and out of the car and coping with him when his back legs give way.


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

galaxy said:



			It's very unwise to do it from my experience.  But then it's not just dogs....  My old horse was inbred.  his great grandfather on one side was his grandfather on the other.  And the result was that his private parts were deformed (I won't get graphic!)  He had to undergo unecessary operations but did go on to live a happy normal life.  The breeder didn't do it again though!!!!

and cats......  well I've seen they are definitely not fussy by choice!!!!!  Inbred hussies   

Click to expand...


I deliberately avoided mentioning horses as well!!  Don't get me started!!


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			Of course not!!  How can you diagnose hip dysplasia looking at a dog?  This is from talking to the owners - not just in our tiny village, but all over the countryside.  We met a lovely couple in Norfolk on holiday with a lovely young GSD bitch who had been diagnosed with dysplasia.  She was only 4 and was virtually a cripple.  She had cost them a lot of money as she was supposedly from good stock.  I am a very cynical old buzzard I'm afraid.

And no, I am not prepared to say the name of the training club. It is a large, well known club of some repute and the chap .  They have enough to cope with having to lift their large dog in and out of the car and coping with him when his back legs give way.
		
Click to expand...

So basically every GSD you have met has hip dysplasia. Righto. You must indeed be especially unlucky, and I overly lucky then.

If it is the club I am thinking of, there are plenty of pics of dogs doing agility, maybe I am thinking of the wrong club? 

Also it is common sense to lift young large breeds in and out of cars in youth to prevent wear and tear in the joints


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			So basically every GSD you have met has hip dysplasia. Righto. You must indeed be especially unlucky, and I overly lucky then.

If it is the club I am thinking of, there are plenty of pics of dogs doing agility, maybe I am thinking of the wrong club? 

Also it is common sense to lift young large breeds in and out of cars in youth to prevent wear and tear in the joints 

Click to expand...


No, I did not say that.  It is especially irritating when people put words into your mouth!  Indeed, I went out of my way to say what an amazingly healthy GSD the GSD Dog Club man had 25 years ago when we first moved into the village.

We met 2 dogs last weekend, both GSDs, with dreadful roach backs - miles from our own area.  We didn't get a chance to stop and talk, but they looked to be middle aged, about 6 possibly.  roach backed, and fallen haunches, and were walking in that horrible stiff-legged way that can (please note the word can, not does!) indicate some sort of hip problem, arthritic or otherwise.

The GSD next door does not fall into the category of young, he is middle aged at around 6 or 7 - he should be perfectly capable of springing in and out of the back of the car, up and down the steps, just like my old boy who is nearly 11 and who can jump over the cross country jumps in our area with ease, catch rabbits and run like the wind - old mongrel that he is!!  

Added on as a PS:

I forgot to mention a gorgeous heavy coated white GSD bitch that we know.  she had severe hip dysplasia at only the age of 2.  She had some major op, hip replacement?  not sure, but whatever, she was an absolute cripple at the age of only 2.  She is now a completely rebuilt dog - £3,000 later!!  But nonetheless, with her new hips, or whatever the vet did, she is as right as rain.

What a dreadful shame though that she had to suffer so at such a tender age.  And she too was apparently very well bred and cost a fortune.

I'll stick with my mongrels any day - at least if they turn out to have some chronic health problems they haven't cost me a fortune to buy, and their insurance is dirt cheap!


----------



## Alec Swan (21 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			Well in 1895, there was a need for a dog like, for example, a GSD and we didn't have a glut of unwanted dogs, overflowing rescues and there were no backyard breeders, or free ad sites.
		
Click to expand...

Correct,  and those which weren't up to the mark,  were destroyed,  they weren't passed on to others,  for breeding. 

Within the modern breeding regimes of the modern breeders,  I wonder what they do with their mistakes.

Alec.


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

Yep, very unlucky and yep, I must be thinking of the wrong club


----------



## blackcob (21 May 2013)

A long coated white GSD cannot be in any way described as well bred, IME. 

My 'pedigree' dogs cost me £100 apiece (one a rescue, one a rehome) and although they've both turned out to have various ailments none of them can be pinned on their breeding, they are conditions common to any dog. One has a roach back, one a back like a tabletop - guess which one recently underwent invasive orthopaedic surgery...


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			I forgot to mention a gorgeous heavy coated white GSD bitch that we know.  she had severe hip dysplasia at only the age of 2.  She had some major op, hip replacement?  not sure, but whatever, she was an absolute cripple at the age of only 2.  She is now a completely rebuilt dog - £3,000 later!!  But nonetheless, with her new hips, or whatever the vet did, she is as right as rain.

What a dreadful shame though that she had to suffer so at such a tender age.  And she too was apparently very well bred and cost a fortune.
		
Click to expand...

White is a colour fault and longcoats are a coat fault (I have a longcoat) according to the breed standard so not sure how you get 'very well bred'.

As you are such an opponent of inbreeding you will know that some of those who deliberately breed for off colours in the GSD such as white, blue and liver operate from a small gene pool and from lines known to produce hip dysplasia and epilepsy.


----------



## MurphysMinder (21 May 2013)

NikkiJ, I suspect the dogs you saw were maybe just walking rather than gaiting, which maybe can look stiff legged to the uninitiated, but as you so rightly say there is no way anyone can assume that is down to hd.
Galaxy has posted in some detail the various ways the KC are trying to improve the world of the pedigree dog (her dog is a GSP by the way not a GSD), and yet still you seem to want to rely on evidence from a tv programme that was known to be sensationalist, and views of a vet who left the RSPCA, rather suddenly, apparently to concentrate on his tv career restoring vehicles, a surprising move for someone who was so concerned about the welfare of animals in my view.

Just seen your comment about the white GSD.  I would think it unlikely a white is well bred, it used to be a disqualifying colour so those who do breed them have a limited gene pool (so yes they probably are inbred) and imho they are breeding them for the wrong reasons.


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			White is a colour fault and longcoats are a coat fault (I have a longcoat) according to the breed standard so not sure how you get 'very well bred'.

As you are such an opponent of inbreeding you will know that some of those who deliberately breed for off colours in the GSD such as white, blue and liver operate from a small gene pool and from lines known to produce hip dysplasia and epilepsy.
		
Click to expand...


The point is that the breeder sold the dog as "very well bred" ... for a very large sum of money!  This is the point I am making ... that pedigrees are not necessarily the bees knees, any more than mongrels are.


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

MurphysMinder said:



			NikkiJ, I suspect the dogs you saw were maybe just walking rather than gaiting, which maybe can look stiff legged to the uninitiated, but as you so rightly say there is no way anyone can assume that is down to hd.
Galaxy has posted in some detail the various ways the KC are trying to improve the world of the pedigree dog (her dog is a GSP by the way not a GSD), and yet still you seem to want to rely on evidence from a tv programme that was known to be sensationalist, and views of a vet who left the RSPCA, rather suddenly, apparently to concentrate on his tv career restoring vehicles, a surprising move for someone who was so concerned about the welfare of animals in my view.

Just seen your comment about the white GSD.  I would think it unlikely a white is well bred, it used to be a disqualifying colour so those who do breed them have a limited gene pool (so yes they probably are inbred) and imho they are breeding them for the wrong reasons.
		
Click to expand...

The dogs were walking, but in no way was this normal, or could be described as normal.  Hobbling would be a better description!  As a dog owner of over 40 years, I know a lame dog when I see one.

Whoever said I rely on evidence from Mark Evans?  I plough my own furrough in life, I do not rely on anything I read necessarily.


----------



## MurphysMinder (21 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			Correct,  and those which weren't up to the mark,  were destroyed,  they weren't passed on to others,  for breeding. 

Within the modern breeding regimes of the modern breeders,  I wonder what they do with their mistakes.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

It depends what you mean by mistakes Alec.  Most breeders I know will retain, or place with other breeders, the best pups from a litter, and the rest are placed in working/pet homes with a "not for breeding" endorsement.    I bred 2 "mistakes", blue GSD puppies.  After considerable discussion with the breed geneticist they were placed in pet homes, with endorsements and they were castrated when they were old enough.  Nowadays of course, I could have advertised them as "rare blue" and stood them at stud and made myself a few quid.


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

Buyer beware, anyone who does their research should know not to pay top whack for such an animal, which I guess brings us back to the original point of the thread, which is now giving me a massive headache.


----------



## MurphysMinder (21 May 2013)

Okay so you don't rely on evidence from Mark Evans, but this was the impression I got from your comment earlier on.

"Are you telling me that it is OK to interbreed - it's worse than inbreeding - our dogs in this way? Did you not see that programme about Crufts - Mark Evans - and hear his statement about a parade of mutants?"


----------



## Luci07 (21 May 2013)

Can I just bring this thread back to a little bit of normality?! I think OP is misunderstanding why she was jumped on for her comment and actually it's not about being snobbish about cross breeds as AmyMay thought.

It's about the fact that ALL our rescues are stuffed to the brim with unwanted dogs, that vast numbers of healthy young dogs are being destroyed every day (last estimate for "my" breed is that around 70 Stafford or Stafford crosses are killed each day).   This is why someone deliberately  breeding an unproven cross is viewed so poorly as a lot of us are involved in some way with rescue work and all we see is someone else breeding for a quick buck and by doing so, another healthy dog is destroyed when people take on that pup and not a rescue. I fully accept that there are some real issues around breeding pedigrees but at least the good breeders are really trying to do something to improve their lines and (certainly within the Stafford community) the better breeders have cut back. 

I could actually write a list of what I wanted from a Stafford in terms of colour, gender,age, training and still be spoilt for choice with the dogs in rescue.


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

Luci07 said:



			Can I just bring this thread back to a little bit of normality?! I think OP is misunderstanding why she was jumped on for her comment and actually it's not about being snobbish about cross breeds as AmyMay thought.

It's about the fact that ALL our rescues are stuffed to the brim with unwanted dogs, that vast numbers of healthy young dogs are being destroyed every day (last estimate for "my" breed is that around 70 Stafford or Stafford crosses are killed each day).   This is why someone deliberately  breeding an unproven cross is viewed so poorly as a lot of us are involved in some way with rescue work and all we see is someone else breeding for a quick buck and by doing so, another healthy dog is destroyed when people take on that pup and not a rescue. I fully accept that there are some real issues around breeding pedigrees but at least the good breeders are really trying to do something to improve their lines and (certainly within the Stafford community) the better breeders have cut back. 

I could actually write a list of what I wanted from a Stafford in terms of colour, gender,age, training and still be spoilt for choice with the dogs in rescue.
		
Click to expand...

Hi Luci!  I'm fully aware of rescue centres, the massive problem we have of unwanted dogs - both pedigree and crosses - etc. etc.  However - no-one has yet answered why it is somehow acceptable for close-breeding, in breeding, inter-breeding, in pedigree dogs - but not in us - the human race?  The very nature of a pedigree means that it is a closed gene pool - I have never heard of any pedigree breed out-crossing for instance, this would be totally frowned upon I am sure - but is entirely necessary to cure an inherent genetic problem in any one breed.  Surely it is not good enough just to out-cross to another dog of the same pedigree?  Why?  Because they all come from the same gene pool - a bit like all Thoroughbred horses descend from 3 original Arabian stallions - The Byerley Turk, The Darley Arabian, and The Godolphin Arabian.

I don't "buy" the argument that breeding from mongrels should be frowned upon because we have far too many dogs of all types in rescues, sorry, I completely understand what a sad and massive problem this is, but cannot accept the wrongness of breeding mongrels - to me, hybrid vigour is everything that I love the most about my dogs, their extraordinary genetic mix of wolf, alaskan malamute, siberian husky, GSD and a couple of out crossings to collie.


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

MurphysMinder said:



			Okay so you don't rely on evidence from Mark Evans, but this was the impression I got from your comment earlier on.

"Are you telling me that it is OK to interbreed - it's worse than inbreeding - our dogs in this way? Did you not see that programme about Crufts - Mark Evans - and hear his statement about a parade of mutants?"
		
Click to expand...

That was not my intention - I think Mark Evans statement "a parade of mutants" is an absolutely brilliant description of many of the breeds that we see at Crufts.  But I certainly don't rely on his evidence, or anybody else's for that matter.  I am perfectly capable of sorting out for myself something that I have believed strongly in for decades - that close breeding, in-breeding, inter-breeding is WRONG and that hybrid vigour is everything.  As a species, us humans do not mate with our grand-parents, our mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers - even mating with our cousins is widely accepted by all GP's to be a disastrous thing to do.  So why - please someone tell me why - this somehow is accepted by millions of dog lovers - and horse lovers too - to be perfectly acceptable!!  I am struggling to understand this, and I have struggled ever since I lost my beloved bloodhound to epilepsy when I was 17 years of age - due, the vet said, to a defect well known with bloodhounds.


----------



## Nikki J (21 May 2013)

Some further evidence of the importance of hybrid vigour.

Link to a website re research into inherited diseases of dogs, including what they describe as "mixed breed dogs"

http://www.vet.cam.ac.uk/idid/

Just as an example, GSDs are listed with *51 inherited diseases*

I could not find with a brief scan of the various breeds any individual breed coming anywhere near this large amount.  The closest was the labrador retriever with 39.

Ratter terriers = 2
Alaskan Malamutes = 11
Siberian Huskies = 14
Canaan dog (a breed I was going to get a few years ago) = 1
Cavalier spaniel = 18
**** Hound = 1

*Mixed breeds = 16*

Parson jack russell = 2

So, following this very brief scan of the University of Cambridge's researches, it would appear that the GSD has by far the highest number of inherited diseases.

Ratters only 2 - bearing out my theory of hybrid vigour
the American **** Hound only 1 - again, bearing out my theory of hv
Canaan dog = ditto

I rest my case, m'Lud!!


----------



## MurphysMinder (21 May 2013)

Interesting that according to that link epilepsy is not listed as an inherited disease in bloodhounds, yet your vet told you it was a well known defect in the breed.
Not sure why you are victorious that the GSD apparently has the highest number of inherited diseases, isn't this thread about a GWHP x lab.  Again from that link I note both of these breeds can suffer from haemophilia B, and although hd is not listed on the cambridge link as being an inherited disease for GWHP, it is a requirement that dogs are scored under the ABS which to me would suggest there is a problem in the breed.


----------



## stargirl88 (21 May 2013)

Erm, OP, if you're still lurking somewhere and haven't done a runner, have a look at the rescue links a few people have put on here. Or even have a google! I'm sure you'll be able to find one from a previous litter, that is no longer wanted


----------



## CorvusCorax (21 May 2013)

Gosh, a numerically very large breed which is (and has been historically) tested for hereditary problems more than pretty much all other breeds, comes out with the most heritable illnesses. Shock horror.


----------



## eatmyshorts (21 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			As a species, us humans do not mate with our grand-parents, our mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers - even mating with our cousins is widely accepted by all GP's to be a disastrous thing to do.  So why - please someone tell me why - this somehow is accepted by millions of dog lovers - and horse lovers too - to be perfectly acceptable!!
		
Click to expand...

TBH, I suspect the question hasn't been answered because it's not relevant. You are talking about two completely different species. You may as well be questioning arranged marriages, as that's what we do to dogs! Such diverse examples don't make for a good argument. Coincidentally, did you know that Penicillin kills guinea pigs?

As for your choice of dogs, surely there's already a similar crossbreed sitting in a pound somewhere that would meet your needs and be a better option than paying crazy money to line the pockets of one of these irresponsible breeders jumping on the bandwagon the latest ridiculous fad of breeding designer dogs? I have nothing against crossbreeds, but there are more than enough accidental matings to provide people with wonderful pets.


----------



## gunnergundog (22 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			The very nature of a pedigree means that it is a closed gene pool - I have never heard of any pedigree breed out-crossing for instance, this would be totally frowned upon I am sure - but is entirely necessary to cure an inherent genetic problem in any one breed.  Surely it is not good enough just to out-cross to another dog of the same pedigree?  Why?  Because they all come from the same gene pool - a bit like all Thoroughbred horses descend from 3 original Arabian stallions - The Byerley Turk, The Darley Arabian, and The Godolphin Arabian.
		
Click to expand...

Actually, this has been done - both officially and unofficially.  Probably the most publicised case in recent times was the Dalmation that was imported from USA a few years ago.  It was the result of an outcross a few generations back to an English pointer in an attempt to reduce the uric acid issue that comes with the breed.


----------



## Nikki J (22 May 2013)

MurphysMinder said:



			Interesting that according to that link epilepsy is not listed as an inherited disease in bloodhounds, yet your vet told you it was a well known defect in the breed.
Not sure why you are victorious that the GSD apparently has the highest number of inherited diseases, isn't this thread about a GWHP x lab.  Again from that link I note both of these breeds can suffer from haemophilia B, and although hd is not listed on the cambridge link as being an inherited disease for GWHP, it is a requirement that dogs are scored under the ABS which to me would suggest there is a problem in the breed.
		
Click to expand...

We had our bloodhound when I was 16 - decades ago.  Maybe the breed has improved, I know not, back then DNA and genetic diseases were not common parlance!  I can only quote what our vet said at the time - we had the dog put down.  He was the love of my life, I was devoted to that dog and him to me.

I am not victorious at all about the poor wretched GSD breed.  I think it is a tragedy that the most popular breed in the UK also has the most inherited diseases.  I am fully aware that this thread is about GWP x lab, not pedigree dogs.  However, somebody made the startling comment about why should someone want to cross a GWP with a lab in the first place, which triggered these extremely interesting threads which I am thoroughly enjoying.  I hold very strong views about the injustice done to mongrels, as is apparent!


----------



## Nikki J (22 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			Gosh, a numerically very large breed which is (and has been historically) tested for hereditary problems more than pretty much all other breeds, comes out with the most heritable illnesses. Shock horror.
		
Click to expand...

On what are you basing that statement?  I think the facts are quite clear - the GSD is the most "unhealthiest" breed based on the UOC study - I am sure their researchers are capable of taking into account that there are more GSDs in the UK than any other breed.  I haven't waded through each breed yet - but based on the few breeds that I selected, the GSD was outstanding as the breed with the most inherited disorders.


----------



## Nikki J (22 May 2013)

eatmyshorts said:



			TBH, I suspect the question hasn't been answered because it's not relevant. You are talking about two completely different species. You may as well be questioning arranged marriages, as that's what we do to dogs! Such diverse examples don't make for a good argument. Coincidentally, did you know that Penicillin kills guinea pigs?

As for your choice of dogs, surely there's already a similar crossbreed sitting in a pound somewhere that would meet your needs and be a better option than paying crazy money to line the pockets of one of these irresponsible breeders jumping on the bandwagon the latest ridiculous fad of breeding designer dogs? I have nothing against crossbreeds, but there are more than enough accidental matings to provide people with wonderful pets.
		
Click to expand...

Of COURSE it is relevant!!  We are as a species mammals - so are dogs!!  We are close enough for it to be extremely relevant!!

Close breeding is WRONG, pure and simple.  Whether we be talking about humans, apes, horses, dogs, any mammalian species.  Hybrid vigour is extremely important - without it, a species cannot survive.

How dare you tell me what type of dog I should have!!  FYI, I have rescued several dogs in my life time, starting with a golden retriever, followed by a labrador.  Then when I married for the first time, Jakey - the GSP x lab was a rescue.  Lizzie, the Wittekind GSP was also a rescue, even though she was a pedigree.  Then my 2 current boys are both rescues.  The only rescue I have EVER had to pay for was my boy Tai, who although came free, I gave a £100 donation to the lovely lady who runs a small rescue service for Utonagans.  So don't you go accusing me of lining breeders pockets - with the exception of the mal x wolf, whom I did pay for as an 8 week old puppy, ALL my rescues - both pedigree and cross - have been FREE.

So please get your facts straight before criticising others and trying to tell them what to do.


----------



## Nikki J (22 May 2013)

gunnergundog said:



			Actually, this has been done - both officially and unofficially.  Probably the most publicised case in recent times was the Dalmation that was imported from USA a few years ago.  It was the result of an outcross a few generations back to an English pointer in an attempt to reduce the uric acid issue that comes with the breed.
		
Click to expand...

How very interesting - do we know if it was successful, or partially successful?  I guess it would have to be repeated with different outcrosses many times to help, otherwise you would just end up back where you started!


----------



## CorvusCorax (22 May 2013)

I am basing it on the fact that the GSD is one of the most numerically popular breed in the world and is subject to more health tests than almost any other. I am sure you can find that out on Google or Wiki.

(Oh and Helmut Raiser has suggested an outcross to the Maliois also)


----------



## Nikki J (22 May 2013)

So can anyone explain to me - sensibly, not with ridiculous erroneous claims - why it is OK to close breed dogs and horses, but not humans?  Why is it illegal for us to mate with our mothers, fathers or grandparents, but somehow it is perfectly OK for dogs and horses?


----------



## CorvusCorax (22 May 2013)

Because dogs and horses are not humans. The End.


----------



## Nikki J (22 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			I am basing it on the fact that the GSD is one of the most numerically popular breed in the world and is subject to more health tests than almost any other. I am sure you can find that out on Google or Wiki.

(Oh and Helmut Raiser has suggested an outcross to the Maliois also)
		
Click to expand...

So what?  Why should that make the GSD more prone to inherited diseases just because it is tested more than any other breed - assuming that to be true.  Don't you think that the eminent scientists at UOC would have thought of that and taken it into account?  In other words, all the breeds they suggested were subjected to exactly the same tests?

I have no idea of course, but I am using my intelligence to assume that if I can think of something, then a Cambridge University professor would be able to!!


----------



## NeverSayNever (22 May 2013)

We are, as a species - humans. Dogs are dogs. Both species belong to the class 'Mammals'.


....gets back behind the sofa


----------



## Nikki J (22 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			Because dogs and horses are not humans. The End.
		
Click to expand...


Not good enough!!  Elucidate - all species are mammals, we reproduce in the same way, with a few minor differences.  We are all governed by our genes, our genetic make up is everything.  Which is why stallions like Nijinksky lead such fantastic lives once their racing days are over.  Everyone knows that there is a possibility that having Nijinksky cover your mare could just result in another fantastic racehorse.   We also know as intelligent human beings that it is extremely undesirable to mate with our grandmother or our grandfather, or our brother, or sister, or father or mother because there is an extremely high likelihood of any subsequent offspring being genetically crippled in some way or ways. 

So therefore why should it be any different for dogs and horses to breed through such close matings, and for it to be somehow to be perfectly OK?  Don't you think that just some of the 2,000 plus known genetic diseases in our dogs might be attributable to such close breeding?

Think of the Russian royal family and the Csararevitch (spelling?) with haemophilia - directly attributable to inbreeding which was rife in royal families.  

I'm at a loss to understand why you think it is perfectly OK to inbreed, close breed, call it what you will our dogs, when clearly it is very definitely not OK to do the same with our own species.


----------



## s4sugar (22 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			Of COURSE it is relevant!!  We are as a species mammals - so are dogs!!  We are close enough for it to be extremely relevant!!

Close breeding is WRONG, pure and simple.  Whether we be talking about humans, apes, horses, dogs, any mammalian species.  Hybrid vigour is extremely important - without it, a species cannot survive.

How dare you tell me what type of dog I should have!!  FYI, I have rescued several dogs in my life time, starting with a golden retriever, followed by a labrador.  Then when I married for the first time, Jakey - the GSP x lab was a rescue.  Lizzie, the Wittekind GSP was also a rescue, even though she was a pedigree.  Then my 2 current boys are both rescues.  The only rescue I have EVER had to pay for was my boy Tai, who although came free, I gave a £100 donation to the lovely lady who runs a small rescue service for Utonagans.  So don't you go accusing me of lining breeders pockets - with the exception of the mal x wolf, whom I did pay for as an 8 week old puppy, ALL my rescues - both pedigree and cross - have been FREE.

So please get your facts straight before criticising others and trying to tell them what to do.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, I misunderstood you. I thought you wanted a deliberately bred, from health tested parents, cross bred puppy because you had seen some of this cross and liked the look rather than a purebred bred by someone who had invested time and money into producing good & healthy dogs and charging accordingly. You now seem to think it should be free and that rescues don't incur any expenses picking up after irresponsible breeders.

Instead of ranting about subjects you apparently know knothing about perhaps you should do some research into codes of ethics and breeding practices. 
I have bred purebred litters with an inbreeding coefficient of zero over 10 generations. I know of crossbreeds with an inbreeding cooefficent of 25 plus. I know of a feral, isolated, cat colony that only had one dominant male for around three years -just work out the inbreeding there.


----------



## Nikki J (22 May 2013)

s4sugar said:



			Sorry, I misunderstood you. I thought you wanted a deliberately bred, from health tested parents, cross bred puppy because you had seen some of this cross and liked the look rather than a purebred bred by someone who had invested time and money into producing good & healthy dogs and charging accordingly. You now seem to think it should be free and that rescues don't incur any expenses picking up after irresponsible breeders.

Instead of ranting about subjects you apparently know knothing about perhaps you should do some research into codes of ethics and breeding practices. 
I have bred purebred litters with an inbreeding coefficient of zero over 10 generations. I know of crossbreeds with an inbreeding cooefficent of 25 plus. I know of a feral, isolated, cat colony that only had one dominant male for around three years -just work out the inbreeding there.
		
Click to expand...

What on earth are you talking about!!  when did I EVER say that I didn't believe rescue centres should, or do, or don't, charge!!  I have merely related MY OWN EXPERIENCES that I have never had to pay for a rescue.  I wonder if this could be because I have never rescued a dog from an actual rescue centre - like, for instance, the Blue x or Battersea.  Not that you would trouble yourself to find out before wading in  All the dogs I have rescued have been taken on because they had fallen into adverse circumstances.  Lizzie, the pedigree GSP, I was given by a friend who could no longer keep her - on the understanding that I would mate her with a GSP male called Boris, who was also a Wittekind, and give her the pick of the litter.  This is exactly what happened a couple of years after I took Lizzie in.  jakey was rescued from a nunnery of all places.  The old nun who had her died, and the other nuns didn't want to keep her, so Yours Truly stepped into the breach.  I may have given the nunnery a donation, I really cannot remember.  My wolfie boy who happens to be son very coincidentally of my old wolf cross, belonged to a friend of our's who had a bad accident and could no longer keep Ben, so we took him in free of charge.  Tai we rescued a few years ago from a man who loved him to bits but due to Tai's severe separation anxiety he had to rehome him.  We got Tai for free, but gave a £100 donation to the lady who was the intermediary.

I don't know a huge amount about genetics - my OH is the medical scientist - but my own commonsense and education is enough to tell me that inbreeding is WRONG, end of, full stop, period.  If it was OK to close breed, then like the royal family and aristocrats in the old days, we would continuously marry our cousins - and continuously produce children with genetic problems, as used to happen.

Actually, a can quote an example from the hospital where I work as a med sec.  I temped a few years ago for the Neonatal Consultant, and one morning he exclaimed out loud "o no!"  Apparently, he had had a new born baby in the Neonatal Unit who had died from some genetic condition which I forget, and because the parents had already got healthy children of both sexes, my boss told them that they must not have any more children because undoubtedly it would end up in the same tragic way.  The parents were first cousins, not from this country.  They ignored my boss, had another child, and the poor wee mite was afflicted with the same serious genetic problem with the same tragic ending.


----------



## Katikins (22 May 2013)

NikkiJ, you do seem to be coming across as rather close minded and unwilling to listen to other people's reasoned statements - whether that is your intention or not.  Nobody on here has said they think that daughter/father, grandfather/granddaughter etc. matings are OK and ANY responsible breeder wouldn't even consider it (regardless of the fact that you can't register the resulting pups anyway).

Yes, way way back certain breeds were produced via in/interbreeding when DNA and genetics weren't even known to exist - thank the Victorians for that.  However, the way you are talking sounds like you think that breed a X breed b means a healthier dog.  Which is a complete falasy (sp).  There is a chance that the resulting puppies will have zero of the defects that either breed could be prone too, there is also an equal chance that they will have the defects from both breed a and breed b.  PLUS, as these breedings are generally (note I said generally, not always) done by people who have a 'pretty bitch' and are not put through the same vigorous health tests and genetic research, there is no way to trace what lines, if any, the puppies come from.  These also 'tend' to be the kind of breeders who don't offer lifetime guarantees for the resulting puppies, don't socialise properly, don't register/microchip/vaccinate etc (again, this is a generalisation).

My own personal opinion is that anyone breeding should be doing it for one reason and one reason only... for the betterment of the breed.  Health tested parents, full research into the genetic lines and then proper vet care, socialisation, education of new owners etc once the puppies are here.  This is the ONLY way that we can actually work to getting these defects out of the breed - by ensuring that those who do carry genes or genetic markers for certain defects are NOT bred from!

Certain people will always want pedigrees so you can have the best idea possible of what dog you will end up with.  That is why I went to a breeder.... after doing 2 years of research into the breed and available breeders!  Regarding the dalmation that was discussed, due to the outcrossing with the pointer this bitch not only didn't have the acid problem herself, but also didn't carry the gene to pass it to her offspring.  So outcrossing can be HUGELY beneficial to a breed, but this isn't just some dally and pointer grabbed off the street and stuck back end to back end with each other.  A huge amount of research went into this.

If someone doesn't want a pedigree, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of accidental matings every year which can easily supply the demand for 'mongrels'.  From my point of view, if you want to know what you are getting then go for a pedigree from a GOOD RESPONSIBLE breeder... if you are not bothered then go to a rescue.  Its as black and white as that.

Sorry for the rant


----------



## Nikki J (22 May 2013)

Katikins said:



			NikkiJ, you do seem to be coming across as rather close minded and unwilling to listen to other people's reasoned statements - whether that is your intention or not.  Nobody on here has said they think that daughter/father, grandfather/granddaughter etc. matings are OK and ANY responsible breeder wouldn't even consider it (regardless of the fact that you can't register the resulting pups anyway).

*That's unfortunate, because I am not at all close-minded to REASON.  But there can be nothing reasonable about anybody expressing amazement at the thought of a GWP crossed with a labrador!  It might well be the norm now for no closer matings than first cousins to take place in the pedigree world - I have no idea either way, as I am not involved in such a world - but most certainly just a few short years ago it most definitely WAS the norm*

Yes, way way back certain breeds were produced via in/interbreeding when DNA and genetics weren't even known to exist - thank the Victorians for that.  However, the way you are talking sounds like you think that breed a X breed b means a healthier dog.  Which is a complete falasy (sp).  There is a chance that the resulting puppies will have zero of the defects that either breed could be prone too, there is also an equal chance that they will have the defects from both breed a and breed b.  PLUS, as these breedings are generally (note I said generally, not always) done by people who have a 'pretty bitch' and are not put through the same vigorous health tests and genetic research, there is no way to trace what lines, if any, the puppies come from.  These also 'tend' to be the kind of breeders who don't offer lifetime guarantees for the resulting puppies, don't socialise properly, don't register/microchip/vaccinate etc (again, this is a generalisation).

*No, not way back - very recently!  And the point I am trying to make is that of course a cross breed can be unhealthy, of course it can, just the same as a pedigree dog can be unhealthy.  It is the concept of hybrid vigour I am trying to get across - if you give the genes a good old shuffle, you have a far higher % chance to breed a healthy litter than if you just keep breeding with the same old same old closed gene pool, however distantly related the individual dogs may be within that closed gene pool.  The whole point of this argument is my annoyance at the arrogance of someone who says "why on earth would you want to cross a GWP with a lab"?  I am saying why not?  Why shouldn't you cross a GWP with a lab?  Why is that any worse than crossing a labrador with its first cousin?*

My own personal opinion is that anyone breeding should be doing it for one reason and one reason only... for the betterment of the breed.  Health tested parents, full research into the genetic lines and then proper vet care, socialisation, education of new owners etc once the puppies are here.  This is the ONLY way that we can actually work to getting these defects out of the breed - by ensuring that those who do carry genes or genetic markers for certain defects are NOT bred from!

*The only totally reliable way to breed out genetic diseases from any breed is basically to start again - this is only my opinion, and of course I am not a geneticist, I am not a scientist, a doctor, or anyone of any merit whatsoever.  Just someone who is very opinionated and believes in speaking her mind!!  And to my mind, the only way we can breed out genetic diseases from every pedigree breed is to go back to basics - which means either taking the best representative of each breed and crossing it with a wolf, or taking the best representative of each breed and outcrossing it to the second best representative of that breed which bears absolutely no close relationship to the said best representative.  In other words, going back to basics and starting again.  Frankly, it isn't going to happen - the wolf option would be totally unacceptable for a myriad of reasons, and the second option probably would only partially fix the problem.*

Certain people will always want pedigrees so you can have the best idea possible of what dog you will end up with.  That is why I went to a breeder.... after doing 2 years of research into the breed and available breeders!  Regarding the dalmation that was discussed, due to the outcrossing with the pointer this bitch not only didn't have the acid problem herself, but also didn't carry the gene to pass it to her offspring.  So outcrossing can be HUGELY beneficial to a breed, but this isn't just some dally and pointer grabbed off the street and stuck back end to back end with each other.  A huge amount of research went into this.

*This sounds more like it - I don't agree with the idea of pedigrees = wysiwyg!!  To me, that is an anathema, how boring, you might as well just clone dogs and be done with it!  However, I can accept that most people are not as daft as me and after all there would be no dog breeds if people don't want to buy to a recipe, so overall I can accept the concept of outbreeding to eliminate problems - not sure that it would entirely, because to use your dally as an example, in future generations the faulty gene could rear its ugly head randomly - nevertheless, it must be the way to go, however reluctant I am to admit this*

If someone doesn't want a pedigree, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of accidental matings every year which can easily supply the demand for 'mongrels'.  From my point of view, if you want to know what you are getting then go for a pedigree from a GOOD RESPONSIBLE breeder... if you are not bothered then go to a rescue.  Its as black and white as that.

*I'm bothered - I'm bothered by the fact that virtually all pedigree breeds have major genetic flaws due to irresponsible breeding - personally, I don't think you can beat a good mongrel, and although I can see there is plenty of evidence to the contrary, I personally have NEVER EVER met or had any knowledge of a mongrel who was not healthy - and as someone who adores dogs over and above any other species including her own - even horses! - this means a lot.  Personally, I like a particular type of mongrel - and I have 2 of those lying at my feet at the moment, but then I am mad!!  Most people would run a mile if they had 2 dogs like mine.  But I loves 'em in their all their hybrid splendour - here is a picture of Ben, the wolfie one, taken just an hour or so ago in the back garden!*

Sorry for the rant 

Click to expand...

*You're not ranting at all.  You are speaking from your heart as you see it - we are not so far away from each other, you clearly adore dogs same as me, all dogs, not just pedigrees.  You rant away - there is nothing wrong with passion!!*

Edited to say:  oops - that photograph hasn't worked, will try again!


----------



## Nikki J (22 May 2013)

Here's another attempt - if this fails, I'm off to bed!


----------



## Paint Me Proud (22 May 2013)

Only read the first 6 pages but just want to say I work in an inner city school in a very deprived area and the degree of 'inbred' students we have is astonishing! You can have two girls in the same class be aunt and niece and much much more bizarre, but as far as I'm aware none of them have three ears or only one lung (all though they may be a bit think, lol!)

Just thought i'd share that, lol!


----------



## Alec Swan (22 May 2013)

CaveCanem said:



			Because dogs and horses are not humans. The End.
		
Click to expand...




Nikki J said:



			Not good enough!!  Elucidate - ........
		
Click to expand...

Intelligence,  Compassion,  Love,  Principles and Morality,  Ethos,  Belief and Faith and Charity.  Ethics and the power of reason,  and the list goes on.  

Despite the fact that man doesn't always display the above qualities,  he has the capacity to do so,  and that's what separates humans from animals. 

Those who state that they get on better with animals,  and in some ways I'd be amongst them,  are simply admitting to an inability to deal with their own kind,  animals being the easiest option,  as they tend not to judge us.

There-yer-go,  and all that's whilst I'm sober! 

Alec.


----------



## Nikki J (23 May 2013)

Paint Me Proud said:



			Only read the first 6 pages but just want to say I work in an inner city school in a very deprived area and the degree of 'inbred' students we have is astonishing! You can have two girls in the same class be aunt and niece and much much more bizarre, but as far as I'm aware none of them have three ears or only one lung (all though they may be a bit think, lol!)

Just thought i'd share that, lol!
		
Click to expand...

Lol!!  It's not always obvious.  I cannot remember this particular genetic disease that the case I quoted suffered from, but the Neonatal Consultant was absolutely furious that this couple had gone ahead and had yet another child.

You mention being thick - the classic "Upper Class Twit" - Tim Nice But Dim - is a classic example of a particular class of society "inbreeding" - members of the aristocracy tended at least in the past to marry within the very small gene pool of aristocrats, resulting in too many "Tim Nice But Dim's".


----------



## Nikki J (23 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			Intelligence,  Compassion,  Love,  Principles and Morality,  Ethos,  Belief and Faith and Charity.  Ethics and the power of reason,  and the list goes on.  

Despite the fact that man doesn't always display the above qualities,  he has the capacity to do so,  and that's what separates humans from animals. 

Those who state that they get on better with animals,  and in some ways I'd be amongst them,  are simply admitting to an inability to deal with their own kind,  animals being the easiest option,  as they tend not to judge us.

There-yer-go,  and all that's whilst I'm sober! 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

But we ARE animals.  Homo Sapiens is an animal species - the same as a llama, a lion or a lima.  We like to think we are the most superior species, thanks partly to the fact that as you rightly say we can display all those attributes you mention.  We have the largest brains proportionally.

Our reproductive systems work in a very similar way to dogs - if it's not OK for us to mate with our brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, grandparents, then ipso facto it is the same for dogs too.

Fascinating discussion!!


----------



## Alec Swan (23 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			But we ARE animals.  .......
		
Click to expand...

NO we're not,  we can't be!  We're mammals,  I grant you,  and we've basic traits which can all so often be beyond our control,  in that we often act and react by instinctive displays,  but the factor which separates us from animals,  is that we have Intelligence,  we have the IQ to allow reason.  "Generally",  and there may be the odd spark of reasoning in some,  animals lack this one trait,  and it's the trait which separates us.

How we've got to this stage,  from a conversation about a GWH Pointer and a Labrador mix,  I'm none too sure.  Hey Ho!! 

Alec.


----------



## Clodagh (23 May 2013)

I thought it was opposable thumbs (spell) that did it for us!?


----------



## Nikki J (23 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			NO we're not,  we can't be!  We're mammals,  I grant you,  and we've basic traits which can all so often be beyond our control,  in that we often act and react by instinctive displays,  but the factor which separates us from animals,  is that we have Intelligence,  we have the IQ to allow reason.  "Generally",  and there may be the odd spark of reasoning in some,  animals lack this one trait,  and it's the trait which separates us.

How we've got to this stage,  from a conversation about a GWH Pointer and a Labrador mix,  I'm none too sure.  Hey Ho!! 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Of COURSE we are animals!!  What on earth do you think we are?!  Plants?!!  How arrogant can you possibly be to think that we are the only species on earth to have intelligence!!  You have a most extraordinary idea of life on earth if you think that!!

For once I am absolutely gobsmacked - I don't know what to say to you, I really dont!!  You're winding me up - you've got to be - no-one with your obvious intelligence could possibly believe that 1) we are not an animal species and 2) we are the only intelligent species


----------



## Nikki J (23 May 2013)

LINNAEAN  CLASSIFICATION  OF  HUMANS


Kingdom:   Animalia 
     Phylum:   Chordata
          Subphylum:   Vertebrata
               Class:   Mammalia
                    Subclass:   Theria
                         Infraclass:   Eutheria
                              Order:   Primates
                                   Suborder:  Anthropoidea
                                        Superfamily:   Hominoidea
                                             Family:   Hominidae
                                                  Genus:   Homo
                                                       Species:   sapiens

Ipso facto = homo sapiens = animal (as in part of the Animal Kingdom.


----------



## Alec Swan (23 May 2013)

Most impressive,  but you missed out one vital factor;

INTELLIGENCE.

Humans:  Measurable.
Animals:  Non existent.
__________

Alec.


----------



## eatmyshorts (24 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			Of COURSE it is relevant!!  We are as a species mammals - so are dogs!!  We are close enough for it to be extremely relevant!!

Close breeding is WRONG, pure and simple.  Whether we be talking about humans, apes, horses, dogs, any mammalian species.  Hybrid vigour is extremely important - without it, a species cannot survive.

How dare you tell me what type of dog I should have!!  FYI, I have rescued several dogs in my life time, starting with a golden retriever, followed by a labrador.  Then when I married for the first time, Jakey - the GSP x lab was a rescue.  Lizzie, the Wittekind GSP was also a rescue, even though she was a pedigree.  Then my 2 current boys are both rescues.  The only rescue I have EVER had to pay for was my boy Tai, who although came free, I gave a £100 donation to the lovely lady who runs a small rescue service for Utonagans.  So don't you go accusing me of lining breeders pockets - with the exception of the mal x wolf, whom I did pay for as an 8 week old puppy, ALL my rescues - both pedigree and cross - have been FREE.

So please get your facts straight before criticising others and trying to tell them what to do.
		
Click to expand...

Whoa! Someone needs to take a chill pill! 

I have to disagree with your first statement. I just can't see myself as even vaguely similar to, for example, a whale. Not enough to create an argument in terms of  breeding ethics anyway. 

Your following rant is a complete over-reaction to what i posted. Re your list of rescues, well done you, although i'm sure many of us here could boast an equally admirable list (myself included incidentally). I'm not telling you what to do, just giving my opinion (since that's what forums & discussion boards are for), but it'd be nice if the OP could find a rescue looking for a home, of the breeding she has set her heart on. Unfortunately, i'm just not sure it's a common cross. Would a GSP x lab be considered? I've seen a couple of those looking for homes. Or does it have to be a GWP x lab?


----------



## eatmyshorts (24 May 2013)

P.S In retrospect, i would just like to say, Nikki J, i do hope you are okay - i had no intention of winding you up or causing any offence, but your replies have seemed a bit OTT on occassion. Kind regards xx


----------



## That old chestnut (24 May 2013)

Paint Me Proud said:



			Only read the first 6 pages but just want to say I work in an inner city school in a very deprived area and the degree of 'inbred' students we have is astonishing! You can have two girls in the same class be aunt and niece and much much more bizarre, but as far as I'm aware none of them have three ears or only one lung (all though they may be a bit think, lol!)

Just thought i'd share that, lol!
		
Click to expand...

Off topic here, but just wanted to point out that having niece and aunt in the same class doesn't point to inbreeding in any way, it just means the mother had an older child who happened to have a baby the same time she had another baby herself.  I guess in some inner city schools the older child could be having another child as young as 16/17 (or God forbid younger) and an age gap of 16 years may not be that uncommon. My daughter is 15 years younger than my son (2nd marriage) although thankfully he hasn't had a child yet!


----------



## PucciNPoni (24 May 2013)

And here I thought it was our ability to create and appreciate ART which separates us humans from the rest of the animal world. 

From a DNA perspective, aren't we really close to pigs or dolphins or summat?  Argh - who knows - Someone does but it isnae me at this time of the morning.  

Why is it illegal for humans to marry/mate close rellies?  Because humans make the laws, and we say so.  Doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Animals left to their own devices will certainly and quite readily mate with their own siblings/offspring.  They don't hold the same moral code that people do.


----------



## JennBags (24 May 2013)

But the reason it's illegal in the first place has NOTHING to do with morals  it's about inbreeding causing genetic defects. 

Alec, for once I completely disagree with you.  Just because dogs and horses don't display the same levels of intelligence that (some ) humans do, that does not mean that they won't have the same problems when inbreeding as we do.

NikkiJ, there are some unscrupulous breeders who still in-breed, however I believe the majority of reputable dealers nowadays do not do this; they're more than aware of the problems arising and don't want their dogs to get a bad name for health problems. I think you are unlucky with the GSDs that you see; I also see lots of them, and rarely see one with problems; however my mum has had 2 which have had hip dysplasia, do you know they've still been happy dogs that have led a good life!

I disagree with the new faddy cross-breeds; but then again I also disagree with anyone going out & spending a fortune on a puppy which they're not planning to show, or work, which is just going to be a pet. All they are doing is encouraging more and more breeding, which encourages more puppy farms; all the while our rescue centres are overflowing with dogs; half of which are there because their owners don't have the first idea of how to look after or handle a dog, whether it's an in-bred pedigree or a first-class mongrel


----------



## Alec Swan (24 May 2013)

JennBags said:



			.....

Alec, for once I completely disagree with you.  Just because dogs and horses don't display the same levels of intelligence that (some ) humans do, that does not mean that they won't have the same problems when inbreeding as we do.

.......

Click to expand...

That wasn't what I said!  Nikki J seems convinced that humans are animals.  I'm convinced that whilst both humans and animals are mammals,  it's the possession of intelligence which separates us,  and it's that same intelligence which allows us to realise the results of matings between brothers and sisters,  for instance.  We give it the label of morality,  but casting labels aside,  it's the results of such matings which are at the centre of our reasoning,  and to reason we need what animals lack,  Intelligence! 

Nikki J,  another distinction for you,  as we are _Homo Erectus_ we are distinct form animals in that we have the ability and advantage of walking upright! 

Something else has just occurred to me,  I wonder if animals can ever be diagnosed with mental ill health.  Animals will,  we know,  readily show signs of stress and depression too,  but I'm wondering about clinically measurable complaints,  the flip side of our much lauded intelligence perhaps. 

This is all a bit much,  especially at this time in the morning,  and whilst sober! 

Alec.


----------



## Alec Swan (24 May 2013)

PucciNPoni said:



			.......

....... *Animals left to their own devices will certainly and quite readily mate with their own siblings/offspring*.  They don't hold the same moral code that people do.
		
Click to expand...

That would only be so,  mostly,  whilst animals are in captivity.  Herd or tribe living animals generally eject their (generally male) youngsters,  after puberty,  and herd or tribe leaders are mostly replaced on a regular basis.  There does seem to be a natural order to at least assist in the prevention of incest.  

Alec.


----------



## Nikki J (24 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			Most impressive,  but you missed out one vital factor;

INTELLIGENCE.

Humans:  Measurable.
Animals:  Non existent.
__________

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Absolute RUBBISH!!  
Are you denying that our distant relatives - apes - are not intelligent?  Whales?  Dolphins?  Octopi and squid have proved to be very intelligent.

Are you sure this is not a wind up?  I cannot believe I am seeing what I am reading!!


----------



## Nikki J (24 May 2013)

eatmyshorts said:



			Whoa! Someone needs to take a chill pill! 

I have to disagree with your first statement. I just can't see myself as even vaguely similar to, for example, a whale. Not enough to create an argument in terms of  breeding ethics anyway. 

Your following rant is a complete over-reaction to what i posted. Re your list of rescues, well done you, although i'm sure many of us here could boast an equally admirable list (myself included incidentally). I'm not telling you what to do, just giving my opinion (since that's what forums & discussion boards are for), but it'd be nice if the OP could find a rescue looking for a home, of the breeding she has set her heart on. Unfortunately, i'm just not sure it's a common cross. Would a GSP x lab be considered? I've seen a couple of those looking for homes. Or does it have to be a GWP x lab?
		
Click to expand...

You ARE vaguely similar to a whale - you are a mammal!  

I have already said that I had a GSP x lab - not a GWP, but I would imagine they are not too dissimilar - and the cross was an excellent one!  The dog was extremely healthy, very intelligent (oops - no, it can't be, after all she's only an animal ) and lived to a ripe old age.  And was an excellent retriever.


----------



## eatmyshorts (24 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			I have already said that I had a GSP x lab - not a GWP, but I would imagine they are not too dissimilar - and the cross was an excellent one!  The dog was extremely healthy, very intelligent (oops - no, it can't be, after all she's only an animal ) and lived to a ripe old age.  And was an excellent retriever.
		
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware this thread was about you however.......?


----------



## MurphysMinder (24 May 2013)

eatmyshorts said:



			I wasn't aware this thread was about you however.......?
		
Click to expand...

  I suspect the OP ran away screaming long ago.


----------



## Dry Rot (24 May 2013)

I promised myself I wouldn't contribute to the doggy threads on here as they do not do my blood pressure any good! The science of dog breeding/training must be unique in that knowledge is inversely proportional to experience and learning....

Crossing a pointing breed with a flushing breed is quite common in Ireland (or used to be) where they had (?) a more practical approach to dog ownership. Why anyone would want a working gundog (pure or crossbred) for a household pet is beyond me. I'd rather flog myself with a piece of rusty barbed wire. But, as I've said, the cross used to be quite common and the offspring are usually fairly predictable. (Which is why farmers regularly cross two breeds of sheep -- e.g. Blackface x Blue Faced Leicester = Mule which is crossed again with a meat breed to produce fat lamb -- because they know how the progeny will turn out). You have a dog that can be taught to point, range fairly close, flush, retrieve, etc. Note: I said *can* be trained! They call them "droppers".

Inbreeding does not *cause* faults. Breeding faults are *caused* through the poor selection of breeding stock, whether that is within a pure breed or by outcrossing. Cross a spaniel with hip displaysia with a lab with the same condition and don't be surprised if pups are similarly afflicted. 

There are plenty of examples of successful inbreeding with superb individuals being produced. Google Chillingham Wild Cattle. The Paroahs of Egypt bred brother to sister for thousands of years. I bred a strain of dog here that had been closely inbred since 1825 which were superb examples. Wild populations are occasionally revived from a very small gene pool. All the rabbits in Australia are descended from a few dozen imported pairs. The difference is rigorous selection by Nature (or Man) culling the poorer individuals at each generation. Now we have the show bench, The Kennel Club, and stupidity doing the same job so every defective animal is dragged off to the vets to be "put right", then returned home to breed more rubbish!

A wise animal behaviourist once remarked that "All animals are intelligent in what concerns them". Judging by what I read, that doesn't apply to humans!

I think I'd better stop here before I get carried away. An expert will be along shortly to tell you why this is all wrong.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (24 May 2013)

All the pet hamsters in the world are descended from one pair found in the desert.


----------



## Amymay (24 May 2013)

cinnamontoast said:



			All the pet hamsters in the world are descended from one pair found in the desert. 

Click to expand...

And modern humans are descended from one wonderful woman from Eastern Africa.  Mitochondrial Eve.


----------



## Holding (24 May 2013)

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that the problem with inbreeding is that genetic faults are more likely to be replicated and passed on to the offspring? Which is to say that it doesn't produce problems, just passes them on. So theoretically, healthy parents who are related to each other are more likely to produce healthy offspring than unrelated, unhealthy parents.

And as we're having this (hilarious) debate - it seems to me that dogs and humans both being mammals does not mean that inbreeding dogs can be equated to human incest. If for no other reason than we have incredibly complex ideas of morality influenced by thousands of years of history, while dogs... are dogs. I'm not convinced that the human aversion to incest is based on genetic arguments - would you be quite happy to sleep with your sibling as long as you didn't have children?


----------



## CorvusCorax (24 May 2013)

My old dog had to be separated from his sister when he was entire and she was in season, as do most related dogs I know. 
Apart from the ones owned by lovely fluffy people who swear OH NO! He would NEVER do that!! and end up with puppies a few months later.
Don't know many families who have to divvy up the children in the same way!!!


----------



## JennBags (24 May 2013)

Holding, I'm no expert at all, but I am under the impression that inbreeding can *cause *genetic defects, not merely sustain them.  I am prepared to be corrected though, as I really know very little about this sort of thing.

With regards to your comments re the _human aversion to incest_, this is merely our "culture", and I would suggest is not something that we are born with.  The aversion has been actively encouraged for hundreds of years due to the problems that can arise due to inbreeding.  I am sure that there are uneducated tribes somewhere in the world where sleeping with your brother/sister/father/mother is not that uncommon


----------



## Holding (24 May 2013)

I am sure that there are uneducated tribes somewhere in the world where sleeping with your brother/sister/father/mother is not that uncommon
		
Click to expand...

And clearly I don't know nearly enough about incest as I should, because I thought for sure that while sleeping with your cousin was something that could be either normal or strange depending on your culture, close incest is almost a universal taboo. Aaand now I feel really sorry for the OP, who probably didn't expect her thread to end up here.


----------



## s4sugar (24 May 2013)

Inbreeding cannot cause genetic defects. This starts with a mutation - some mutations are good & some are bad.
Some are selected against and some are not. Some are even self limiting - see OLWS in horses.
 Inbreeding can can bring out recessive genes or increase the probability of them expressing themselves.

A good example is the pointed gene in cats -this causes the Siamese pattern. A friend imported a cat from Australia to widen our gene pool. This cat is black with solid coloured ancestors for 12 generations. His first litter produced a pointed kitten. - you have to go back 15 generations to find a pointed cat in his pedigree although odd ones crop up as siblings five or six generations behind. Only when mated to another carrier can the gene be expressed. This gene is not a problem but similar can occur with all recessive genes which is why so much research is carried out into finding genes and markers for them.


If there are no problem genes then inbreeding cannot concentrate them.


BTW Wolves get HD.  Natural selection prevents badly affected ones from breeding but their less affected siblings can reproduce hence the propensity continues.


----------



## Calcyle (24 May 2013)

Quick reply -
There is a theory that people who spend lots of time together when young, such as siblings, develop some kind of aversion that stops physical attraction between those individuals, so as to prevent inbreeding.

After some googling, I have found that name of this is the 'Westermark Effect', if anyone wants to read further.


----------



## Alec Swan (24 May 2013)

Calcyle said:



			Quick reply -
There is a theory that people who spend lots of time together when young, such as siblings, develop some kind of aversion that stops physical attraction between those individuals, so as to prevent inbreeding.

.......
		
Click to expand...

When we're older,  it's known as marriage. 

Alec.


----------



## Nikki J (24 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			That wasn't what I said!  Nikki J seems convinced that humans are animals.  I'm convinced that whilst both humans and animals are mammals,  it's the possession of intelligence which separates us,  and it's that same intelligence which allows us to realise the results of matings between brothers and sisters,  for instance.  We give it the label of morality,  but casting labels aside,  it's the results of such matings which are at the centre of our reasoning,  and to reason we need what animals lack,  Intelligence! 

Nikki J,  another distinction for you,  as we are _Homo Erectus_ we are distinct form animals in that we have the ability and advantage of walking upright! 

Something else has just occurred to me,  I wonder if animals can ever be diagnosed with mental ill health.  Animals will,  we know,  readily show signs of stress and depression too,  but I'm wondering about clinically measurable complaints,  the flip side of our much lauded intelligence perhaps. 

This is all a bit much,  especially at this time in the morning,  and whilst sober! 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

We do indeed - but our close ape ancestors can also walk upright, just not permanently.  We are the only animal that walks upright continuously.

Glad to hear that you are sober in the morning!  Would hope you would be nothing but!


----------



## Nikki J (24 May 2013)

Hopefully this will put to rest the ridiculous concept that we are the only animals with intelligence:  I've had to split the article because it is quite long:

*Scientists unlock animal intelligence

Meet the apes - and other animals - that can memorise 10,000 pictures, use tools, recognise words, express empathy and put humans to shame at a touch-screen number game.


inShare
Pin Itsubmit to redditEmail articlePrint
Ads by Google

A 5 1/2-year-old chimpanzee named Ayumu performs a memory test with randomly-placed consecutive Arabic numerals, which are later masked, accurately duplicating the lineup on a touch screen computer. Chimps could memorise the nine numerals much faster and more accurately than human adults. Photo: Primate Research Institute of Ky
The more we study animals, the less special we seem.

Baboons can distinguish between written words and gibberish. Monkeys seem to be able to do multiplication. Apes can delay instant gratification longer than a human child can. They plan ahead. They make war and peace. They show empathy. They share.


"It's not a question of whether they think  it's how they think," says Duke University scientist Brian Hare. Now scientists wonder if apes are capable of thinking about what other apes are thinking.

After being told a word, an orangutan points to that object on an iPad computer tablet at Jungle Island zoo in Miami. Photo: AP
The evidence that animals are more intelligent and more social than we thought seems to grow each year, especially when it comes to primates. It's an increasingly hot scientific field with the number of ape and monkey cognition studies doubling in recent years, often with better technology and neuroscience paving the way to unusual discoveries.

Says Josep Call, director of the primate research center at the Max Planck Institute in Germany: "Every year we discover things that we thought they could not do."

Dolphins, like elephants, can recognise themselves in the mirror.
Call says one of his recent more surprising studies showed that apes can set goals and follow through with them.

Orangutans and bonobos in a zoo were offered eight possible tools  two of which would help them get at some food.

At times when they chose the proper tool, researchers moved the apes to a different area before they could get the food, and then kept them waiting as much as 14 hours.

A Rhesus monkey solves addition and subtraction problems on a touch screen computer as part of a study. In nearly every case, when the apes realised they were being moved, they took their tool with them so they could use it to get food the next day, remembering that even after sleeping. The goal and series of tasks didn't leave the apes' minds.

Call says this is similar to a person packing luggage a day before a trip: "For humans it's such a central ability, it's so important."

For a few years, scientists have watched chimpanzees in zoos collect and store rocks as weapons for later use. In May, a study found they even add deception to the mix. They created haystacks to conceal their stash of stones from opponents, just like nations do with bombs.

Hare points to studies where competing chimpanzees enter an arena where one bit of food is hidden from view for only one chimp.

The chimp that can see the hidden food, quickly learns that his foe can't see it and uses that to his advantage, displaying the ability to perceive another ape's situation. That's a trait humans develop as toddlers, but something we thought other animals never got, Hare said.

Monkey memory

And then there is the amazing monkey memory.

At the National Zoo in Washington, humans who try to match their recall skills with an orangutan's are humbled. Zoo associate director Don Moore says: "I've got a Ph.D., for God's sake. You would think I could out-think an orang, and I can't."

In French research, at least two baboons kept memorising so many pictures  several thousand  that after three years researchers ran out of time before the baboons reached their limit. Researcher Joel Fagot at the French National Centre for Scientific Research figured they could memorise at least 10,000 and probably more.

And a chimp in Japan named Ayumu who sees strings of numbers flash on a screen for a split-second regularly beats humans at accurately duplicating the lineup. He's a YouTube sensation, along with orangutans in a Miami zoo that use iPads.*


----------



## Nikki J (24 May 2013)

Rest of the article:

Beyond primates

It's not just primates that demonstrate surprising abilities.

Dolphins, whose brains are 25 per cent heavier than humans, recognise themselves in a mirror. So do elephants. A study in June finds that black bears can do primitive counting, something even pigeons have done, by putting two dots before five, or 10 before 20 in one experiment.

The trend in research is to identify some new thinking skill that chimps can do, revealing that certain abilities are "not uniquely human," said Emory University primatologist Frans de Waal. Then the scientists find that same ability in other primates further removed from humans genetically. Then they see it in dogs and elephants.

"Capacities that we think in humans are very special and complex are probably not so special and not so complex," de Waal said. "This research in animals elevates the animals, but it also brings down the humans... If monkeys can do it and maybe dogs and other animals, maybe it's not as complex as you think."

At Duke, professor Elizabeth Brannon shows videos of monkeys that appear to be doing a "fuzzy representation" of multiplication by following the number of dots that go into a box on a computer screen and choosing the right answer to come out of the box. This is after they've already done addition and subtraction.

This spring in France, researchers showed that six baboons could distinguish between fake and real four-letter words  BRRU vs KITE, for example. And they chose to do these computer-based exercises of their own free will, either for fun or a snack.


----------



## Nikki J (24 May 2013)

Final bit!

*
Empathy isn't just for humans*

It was once thought the control of emotions and the ability to empathise and socialise separated us from our primate cousins. But chimps console, and fight, each other. They also try to soothe an upset companion, grooming and putting their arms around him.

When scientists look at our other closest relative, the bonobo, they see a difference. Bonobos don't kill. Hare says his experiments show bonobos give food to newcomer bonobos, even when they could choose to keep all the food themselves.

One reason scientists are learning more about animal intellect is computers, including touch screens. In some cases, scientists are setting up banks of computers available to primates 24-7. In the French word recognition experiment, Fagot found he got more and better data when it was the baboons' choice to work.

Animal cognition researcher Steve Ross at the Lincoln Park Zoo in Chicago agrees.

"The apes in our case seem to be working better when they have that control, that choice to perform," he said.

What the brain scans show

Brain scans on monkeys and apes also have helped correct mistaken views about ape brain power. It was once thought the prefrontal cortex, the area in charge of higher reasoning, was disproportionately larger than the rest of the brain only in humans, giving us a cognitive advantage, Hare said. But imaging shows that monkey and ape prefrontal cortexes have that same larger scale, he said.

What's different is that the human communication system in the prefrontal cortex is more complex, Hare said.

So there are limits to what non-human primates can do. Animals don't have the ability to communicate with the complexity of human language. In the French study, the baboons can recognise that the letters KITE make a word because through trial and error they learn which letters tend to go together in what order. But the baboons don't have a clue of what KITE means.

It's that gap that's key. "The boundaries are not as sharp as people think, but there are certain things you can't overcome and language is one of them," said Columbia University animal cognition researcher Herbert Terrace.

And that leads to another difference, Ross said. Because apes lack language skills, they learn by watching and mimicking. Humans teach with language and explanation, which is faster and better, Ross said.

Ethical questions

Some of the shifts in scientific understanding of animals are leading to ethical debates. When Emory University researcher Lori Marino in 2001 co-wrote a groundbreaking study on dolphins recognising themselves in mirrors, proving they have a sense of self similar to humans, she had a revelation.

"The more you learn about them, the more you realize that they do have the capacity and characteristics that we think of as a person," Marino said. "I think it's impossible to ignore the ethical implications of these kinds of findings."

After the two dolphins she studied died when transferred to another aquarium, she decided never to work on captive dolphins again. She then became a science adviser to the Nonhuman Rights Project, which seeks legal rights or status for animals. The idea, Marino said, is to get animals such as dolphins "to be deemed a person, not property."

Animals performing tasks in near-natural habitats "is like an Ivy League college" for the apes, Hare said. "We're going to see them do stunning and sophisticated things."


----------



## eatmyshorts (24 May 2013)

This thread has gone kinda crazy!! Turned into a Biology lecture!!

How did we get from this 




 to this 




 and end up here




?!

Poor OP, i bet she wishes she'd never asked!!!


----------



## Cinnamontoast (24 May 2013)

I just love the c&p from random source with no backing (are they peer assessed studies? If not, they're worthless) No-one's mind will be changed because it's coming across as a rant.


----------



## MurphysMinder (24 May 2013)

cinnamontoast said:



			I just love the c&p from random source with no backing (are they peer assessed studies? If not, they're worthless) No-one's mind will be changed because it's coming across as a rant.
		
Click to expand...



You mean you read it?


----------



## Cinnamontoast (24 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			When we're older,  it's known as marriage. 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

PMSL! 

MM, no, of course not! I'm flicking between Silent Hill 2, trying to avoid a dinner invitation (I'm hugely anti social) and three forums! Who has time!! Plus, whatever is said will not change anyone's mind cos it's easy to find 'evidence' on the web to support the fact that say _hybrid vigour_ is true 

We are all animals, some are less or more intelligent than others. The main difference between us and 'dumb' animals is the capacity to reason and the fear and awareness of the consequence of our actions, IMO.


----------



## PucciNPoni (25 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			Something else has just occurred to me,  I wonder if animals can ever be diagnosed with mental ill health.  Animals will,  we know,  readily show signs of stress and depression too,  but I'm wondering about clinically measurable complaints,  the flip side of our much lauded intelligence perhaps. 



Alec.
		
Click to expand...


this has occurred to me several times while grooming certain dogs.  While some things can be explained away with brain tumours etc, I have to wonder if certain dogs have one too many chromosomes?


----------



## PucciNPoni (25 May 2013)

JennBags said:



			But the reason it's illegal in the first place has NOTHING to do with morals  it's about inbreeding causing genetic defects.
		
Click to expand...

But morals do come in to play, hence the reason for the legal argument - morally we as humans don't want to create offspring which will have genetic defects, therefore we've placed a law to try to control it.  At least that's my basic (and perhaps naiive) understanding of it


----------



## amy_b (25 May 2013)

Haven't read the replies but if you are interested a friend has Weim x Lab puppies PM me


----------



## FinnishLapphund (26 May 2013)

MurphysMinder said:



			You mean you read it?

Click to expand...

  If I share a short story about monkeys will anyone read it? 

I remember hearing someone on a Swedish zoo describe the difference in intelligence between their Gorillas, Chimpanzees and Orangutans as this:

Hypothetically, if I accidentally lost my keys one day in the monkey house and the Gorillas got hold of the keys, they would try to use the keys a little here and there for a while, fail to unlock their door, get frustrated and throw away the key.

But if it was the Chimpanzees that found the keys, they would head straight for their door, after a while they would have unlocked it and immediately gone out to investigate the area, at which point they would have been found out and we would have gone in and caught them. 

But if it instead was the Orangutans that found the keys, they would have hid them, and in the evening/night, when they thought everyone had left, they would take out the key, unlock their door and undisturbed be able to go out and investigate the area.    




Since a lot of this thread sounds like people trying to talk to a brickwall, I want to try and cheer you all up, by asking if you would have called the following wallpaper Fun time?  Well maybe it was fun for the little one, but Ouch!


----------



## MurphysMinder (27 May 2013)

Three short paragraphs - a doddle to read, and interesting too.

I think you have it about right with the brick wall, and as for fun time,  yikes no, definitely ouch time.


----------



## FinnishLapphund (27 May 2013)

Glad you read it and found it interesting. 

P.S. Ouch time made me smile.


----------



## Nikki J (27 May 2013)

A few definitions - from various august and respected sources - of intelligence:-

1. The ability to use memory, knowledge, experience, understanding, reasoning, imagination and judgement in order to solve problems and adapt
to new situations. AllWords Dictionary, 2006

*Many animal species are capable of fulfilling some or all of these criteria, not just humans*

2. The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge. The American Heritage
Dictionary, fourth edition, 2000

*Ditto number 1*

3. Individuals di&#64256;er from one another in their ability to understand complex
ideas, to adapt e&#64256;ectively to the environment, to learn from experience,
to engage in various forms of reasoning, to overcome obstacles by taking
thought. American Psychological Association [28]

*Ditto above*

4. The ability to learn, understand and make judgments or have opinions
that are based on reason Cambridge Advance Learners Dictionary, 2006

*Ditto above*

5. Intelligence is a very general mental capability that, among other things,
involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience. Common statement with 52 expert signatories [13]

*Ditto above*

6. The ability to learn facts and skills and apply them, especially when this
ability is highly developed. Encarta World English Dictionary, 2006

*Ditto above*

7. . . . ability to adapt e&#64256;ectively to the environment, either by making a
change in oneself or by changing the environment or &#64257;nding a new one
. . .* intelligence is not a single mental process, but rather a combination of
many mental processes directed toward e&#64256;ective adaptation to the environment. *Encyclopedia Britannica, 2006

*Wow!!  That says it all ... homo sapiens is DEFINITELY not the only intelligent animal on earth!*


----------



## ester (27 May 2013)

gosh encarta... that's a blast from the past!


----------



## Alec Swan (27 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			A few definitions - from various august and respected sources - of intelligence:-

1. The ability to use memory, knowledge, experience, understanding, *reasoning, imagination* and judgement in order to solve problems and adapt
to new situations. AllWords Dictionary, 2006

*Neither of the words that I've highlighted can apply to animals.*

2. The capacity to *acquire and apply knowledge*. The American Heritage
Dictionary, fourth edition, 2000

*Again,  animals have no such capacity.*

3. Individuals di&#64256;er from one another in their ability to understand complex
ideas, to adapt e&#64256;ectively to the environment, to learn from experience,
*to engage in various forms of reasoning, to overcome obstacles by taking
thought*. American Psychological Association [28]

*Yet again,  defining intelligence,  but qualities that animals lack.*

4. The ability to learn, understand and make judgments or have *opinions
that are based on reason* Cambridge Advance Learners Dictionary, 2006

*As above,  and so the list goes on.*

5. Intelligence is a very general mental capability that, among other things,
*involves the ability to reason,* plan, solve problems, *think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas*, learn quickly and learn from experience. Common statement with 52 expert signatories [13]

*Are you really being serious?*

6. The ability to learn *facts and skills* and apply them, especially when this
ability is highly developed. Encarta World English Dictionary, 2006

*List me some Facts and Skills.*

7. . . . ability to adapt e&#64256;ectively to the environment, either by making a
change in oneself or by changing the environment or &#64257;nding a new one
. . .* intelligence is not a single mental process, but rather a combination of
many mental processes directed toward e&#64256;ective adaptation to the environment. *Encyclopedia Britannica, 2006

*And yet again,  you're applying thought processes which whilst common to man,  are simply not present in animals.*

.......
		
Click to expand...

I'm sorry Nikki J,  but you've misused the quotes above.  Whilst those august bodies which you've quoted have adequately defined a "word",  your attachment of those definitions to animals,  is ridiculous.  Sorry but it is,  and it wasn't the intention of the original authors.

Alec.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (28 May 2013)

Plus no-one is bothering to read your massive posts cos they just don't care. Making the same point over and over again is......pointless (and boring).


----------



## s4sugar (28 May 2013)

I have no problem acknowledging that some other species are intelligent just are some humans  are not.


----------



## MurphysMinder (28 May 2013)

s4sugar said:



			I have no problem acknowledging that some other species are intelligent just are some humans  are not.
		
Click to expand...

Snigger.


----------



## misterjinglejay (28 May 2013)

I used to breed and show chinchillas, when they were still classed as an exotic and hadn't long been in the country.
I had pedigrees going back 20 plus years in some cases, and studied basic genetics in order to make the right pairings, and thus  try to 'improve'  the health of the UK herd (I had up to 250 animals, and there were very few other big breeders in this country, so we all worked quite closely).
There is a big difference, IMO, between inbreeding and line breeding, using the coefficient of relationships to work out the ratio. I had to do this for all my stock, making sure I was avoiding inbreeding and increasing (to a certain extent) linebreeding.
In chinchillas, for example, there is a lethal white gene, that if it appears in the homozygous state will result in kits being born without eyes, but is harmless in hetero animals.
But in order to improve on the animals that were first imported/bred in the uk, we had to use this gene to our advantage, producing stronger, fitter animals with better lung capacity, and denser coats to cope with the humid UK temperatures.
This took many generations of line bred animals; if we had gone down the inbreeding route, there would have been more, in this case, lethal white genes floating around! 

http://bowlingsite.mcf.com/genetics/inbreeding.html


----------



## Alec Swan (28 May 2013)

cinnamontoast said:



			Plus no-one is bothering to read your massive posts cos they just don't care. Making the same point over and over again is......pointless (and boring).
		
Click to expand...

Sorry,  you're right,  I'm offski!! 

Alec.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (28 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			Sorry,  you're right,  I'm offski!! 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I wasn't referring to _your_ posts, Alec.


----------



## Nikki J (28 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			I'm sorry Nikki J,  but you've misused the quotes above.  Whilst those august bodies which you've quoted have adequately defined a "word",  your attachment of those definitions to animals,  is ridiculous.  Sorry but it is,  and it wasn't the intention of the original authors.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

The "dictionaries" that I quoted from are to be as a reference source to define words.

The meaning of the word "intelligence" is the same whether it is applied to a worm, a human or a tiger!  I have already given you examples of how many species of animal demonstrate that they have intelligence.

And yet you continue to claim that us animals - humans - are the only ones that have intelligence.

This is completely irrational - I just do not understand how you can be so lacking in knowledge of the natural world!  There are 2 forms of life on this planet, and they all fall under the category of "animal" or "plant".

I absolutely know for sure which life form I am and it sure ain't a plant!  Which are you if you continue to claim that you are not an animal?


----------



## Nikki J (28 May 2013)

cinnamontoast said:



			Plus no-one is bothering to read your massive posts cos they just don't care. Making the same point over and over again is......pointless (and boring).
		
Click to expand...

Exactly!  And ridiculous - aka my friend continuing to insist that humans are not animals.

I apologise profusely for boring the pants off everyone - and especially to the OP whose thread I abused, but really ... I cannot tolerate someone who is obviously as intelligent as Alec coming out with such a load of utter horses poo poo for want of a better phrase!!


----------



## FinnishLapphund (28 May 2013)

cinnamontoast said:



			Plus no-one is bothering to read your massive posts cos they just don't care. Making the same point over and over again is......pointless (and boring).
		
Click to expand...

Admittedly, I have only glanced through some of Nikki J's replies because, sort of as Dry Rot said about "I promised myself I wouldn't contribute to the doggy threads on here as they do not do my blood pressure any good!", reading all of Nikki J's replies wouldn't be good for my blood pressure, but I have e.g. read reply 120, 121 and 122. 

My problems with reading things like for example:



			
				Nikki J said:
			
		


			A study in June finds that black bears can do primitive counting, something even pigeons have done, by putting two dots before five, or 10 before 20 in one experiment.
		
Click to expand...

is the questions about how do we know that they really understand that they're counting? Can we always find out if it is a result of a taught behaviour, and whether it includes actually understanding what it is they're doing or not? 

To that comes that many studies are designed by humans, even though I know that some are based on observing animals in the wild, and e.g. like the study based on "street dogs" in Moscow, such studies, is to me, sometimes equivalent with observing animals in the wild. And that the result is based on how the humans involved interprets the result, maybe the interpretation is spot-on, maybe not.  

Take these two examples:  


			
				 Nikki J said:
			
		


			At Duke, professor Elizabeth Brannon shows videos of monkeys that appear to be doing a "fuzzy representation" of multiplication by following the number of dots that go into a box on a computer screen and choosing the right answer to come out of the box. This is after they've already done addition and subtraction.

In the French study, the baboons can recognise that the letters KITE make a word because through trial and error they learn which letters tend to go together in what order. But the baboons don't have a clue of what KITE means.
		
Click to expand...

They appear to be doing a "fuzzy representation" of multiplication? My interpretation of that, is that the humans have given the monkeys something, and when humans see them interact with whatever it is, it appears as if they're trying to perhaps do multiplications. To me that doesn't sound as an evidence for that those monkeys really understand mathematics. 

And the French study with the baboons, does say that their ability to recognise that the letters Kite is a word, is a result of learning, but that they don't know what the word means. To me it seems like a good example of that animals can learn to do complex things, and that it doesn't have to be combined with an understanding of what it is they're doing.


----------



## ester (28 May 2013)

Like the African parrot who can talk and say things like 'blue square' when shown an object but it is a result of cue and behaviour rather than him actually 'knowing' so to speak. 

I do have some vague recollection of pigeons 'counting' and say with that one it can be related to amount of coloured space taken up rather than number of dots for example.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (28 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			I absolutely know for sure which life form I am and it sure ain't a plant!  Which are you if you continue to claim that you are not an animal?
		
Click to expand...

Mineral!


----------



## ester (28 May 2013)

how many mineral life forms have you met CT?


----------



## FinnishLapphund (28 May 2013)

Nikki J said:



			The "dictionaries" that I quoted from are to be as a reference source to define words.

The meaning of the word "intelligence" is the same whether it is applied to a worm, a human or a tiger!  I have already given you examples of how many species of animal demonstrate that they have intelligence.

And yet you continue to claim that us animals - humans - are the only ones that have intelligence.

This is completely irrational - I just do not understand how you can be so lacking in knowledge of the natural world!  There are 2 forms of life on this planet, and they all fall under the category of "animal" or "plant".

I absolutely know for sure which life form I am and it sure ain't a plant!  Which are you if you continue to claim that you are not an animal?
		
Click to expand...

The Swede Carl Linnaeus (Carl von Linné 




) did divide us in to Animals and Plants quite some time ago, but I've read that many no longer categorise it as just 2 forms of life on earth. 

Two random examples that I found:




			from this site http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/alllife/threedomains.html
Until comparatively recently, living organisms were divided into two kingdoms: animal and vegetable, or the Animalia and the Plantae. In the 19th century, evidence began to accumulate that these were insufficient to express the diversity of life, and various schemes were proposed with three, four, or more kingdoms. The scheme most often used currently divides all living organisms into five kingdoms: Monera (bacteria), Protista, Fungi, Plantae, and Animalia. This coexisted with a scheme dividing life into two main divisions: the Prokaryotae (bacteria, etc.) and the Eukaryotae (animals, plants, fungi, and protists).

Recent work, however, has shown that what were once called "prokaryotes" are far more diverse than anyone had suspected. The Prokaryotae are now divided into two domains, the Bacteria and the Archaea, as different from each other as either is from the Eukaryota, or eukaryotes. No one of these groups is ancestral to the others, and each shares certain features with the others as well as having unique characteristics of its own.
		
Click to expand...





			from this site http://www.ric.edu/faculty/ptiskus/six_kingdoms/
When Linnaeus developed his system of classification, there were only two kingdoms, Plants and Animals. But the use of the microscope led to the discovery of new organisms and the identification of differences in cells.  A two-kingdom system was no longer useful. Today the system of classification includes six kingdoms.  

The Six Kingdoms:

Plants, Animals, Protists, Fungi, Archaebacteria, Eubacteria.


How are organism placed into their kingdoms?

·       Cell type, complex or simple

·       Their ability to make food

·       The number of cells in their body
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Cinnamontoast (28 May 2013)

ester said:



			how many mineral life forms have you met CT? 

Click to expand...

Ooh, loads!  And some silicone ones, too (like what trolls are made of )


----------



## Calcyle (28 May 2013)

This is completely irrational - I just do not understand how you can be so lacking in knowledge of the natural world! There are 2 forms of life on this planet, and they all fall under the category of "animal" or "plant".
		
Click to expand...

I have been beaten to it, however my response was going to be "Tell that to a mushroom".


----------



## That old chestnut (28 May 2013)

I have to say even as a biologist I am now completely lost over what point  is or isn't being made here! I am not going to get drawn into this discussion, but a lot of twaddle is being spouted.


----------



## MurphysMinder (28 May 2013)

You aren't alone, most of us gave up long ago.


----------



## Inthemud (28 May 2013)

Lordy, she might least have supplied us with popcorn.....

Some excellent posts from the usual excellent posters. When will we get a "like" button????

Toddles off to play with my poor, line bred (low COI) pedigrees who have only had a tonne of health tests and are the culmination of years of work by their expert breeders (not me!)....


----------



## That old chestnut (28 May 2013)

Inthemud said:



			Lordy, she might least have supplied us with popcorn.....

Some excellent posts from the usual excellent posters. When will we get a "like" button????

Toddles off to play with my poor, line bred (low COI) pedigrees who have only had a tonne of health tests and are the culmination of years of work by their expert breeders (not me!)....
		
Click to expand...

'Like'


----------



## Spudlet (28 May 2013)

Inthemud said:



			Lordy, she might least have supplied us with popcorn.....

Some excellent posts from the usual excellent posters. When will we get a "like" button????

Toddles off to play with my poor, line bred (low COI) pedigrees who have only had a tonne of health tests and are the culmination of years of work by their expert breeders (not me!)....
		
Click to expand...

*Sneaks in* You'd be better off with a Teacup Toffee...


----------



## CorvusCorax (28 May 2013)

Ermahgerd!!!


This is turning into Shils' cobs thread, the AAD version.


----------



## Spudlet (28 May 2013)

Shocked spaniel is shocked by many statements here: Recommends 'Let me google that for you' for future use...


----------



## Cinnamontoast (28 May 2013)

Inthemud said:



			Lordy, she might least have supplied us with popcorn.....

Some excellent posts from the usual excellent posters. When will we get a "like" button????

Toddles off to play with my poor, line bred (low COI) pedigrees who have only had a tonne of health tests and are the culmination of years of work by their expert breeders (not me!)....
		
Click to expand...

What, no hybrid vigour?!


----------



## MurphysMinder (28 May 2013)

I think hybrid vigour is going to become the new Big Paws.


----------



## Inthemud (28 May 2013)

cinnamontoast said:



			What, no hybrid vigour?! 

Click to expand...


Flippin' eck, then I'd never keep up with them, lol!


----------



## Inthemud (28 May 2013)

MurphysMinder said:



			I think hybrid vigour is going to become the new Big Paws.

Click to expand...

Absolutely! ROFL...

Remember as long as the fault is paired on both sides, BUT THE DOGS ARE DIFFERENT COLOURS, they cancel each other out.....


----------

