Will the Kennel Club Outlaw Father to Daughter Matings?
Following a quote in the Times newspaper last week:
Incestuous inbreeding of dogs – sons with their mothers and half siblings with each other – is also to be tackled.
Heartened by this apparent turnaround by the Kennel Club, who have publicly claimed that it would be ‘against the law’ for them to outlaw father to daughter and brother to sister matings, we asked the Kennel Club to clarify what was meant by incestuous breeding to be ‘tackled’.
The KC secretary Caroline Kisko told us:
First generation mating is now very uncommon. However, the breed health plans that we announced a couple of days ago will include three elements: appearance and conformation, disease and finally, genetic diversity.
The final part will enable us to take advantage of the research that was conducted by the Imperial College, into breeding – so that we can measure and record levels of genetic diversity within the breeds and ensure breeders take appropriate action where problems do exist as a result of a limited gene pool. More information about the specifics of how this will work will be announced in due course. “
The Kennel Club is set to announce the results of its ‘breed health plans’ in February of 2009, just in time for the run up to Crufts.
K9 Magazine has spoken to a number of pet health care professionals who are privately concerned that it will be exceptionally difficult to conduct a comprehensive investigaton in to the health of 209 dog breeds in such a short time frame and they are worried at why such an ambitious target date has been set, seemingly to coincide with Crufts 2009.
The concern has been expressed to us on the basis of the immediate change the KC made to the breed standard for the Pekingese (advising that the breed must have a defined muzzle) but no instruction has been offered as to how breeders may achieve this cosmetic change in a breed which has been purpose bred (to breed standard) to have a notably flat face. The chairman of the Pekingese club, Barry Offiler has publicly hit out at the change in standard, suggesting a lack of awareness as to whether or not outcrosses would be allowed (according to KC rules, they are not) in order to achieve the development of defined muzzle.
“If it’s got a muzzle it won’t be a pekingese, and if we have to breed dogs with a muzzle which breed do we cross with them?”
Many people are fearful that the KC is over reaching in an attempt to hit a self imposed target date rather than comprehensively dealing with the breeds in most urgent need of attention.
Highly Recommended: What dog owner wouldn’t want a piece of THIS action? – Get FREE dog food!
Related posts:
- Kennel Club Bans Father to Daughter Matings (Finally)
- Kennel Club Changes to Put them on Collision Course with Breed Clubs
- The Kennel Club, Crufts and the BBC: The Whole Story
- Pedigree Dogs Exposed Documentary Maker Responds to Kennel Club Moves
- Kennel Club Hits Out at Cavalier Club; Supports Margaret Carter
Loading ...
I was recently looking through the progeny listing of a GB CH Cavalier that I like. It took me back a bit when I noticed that two littermates from him, both GB CH and born 12 Sept. 2002, were mated together to produce a litter born 25 Feb 2007.
For the life of me I can’t figure out, in this day and age when type is well set in this breed, why the health risks involved to the pups from a full sibling mating would be at all acceptable.
This also shows a lack of responsibility toward population genetics in the breed as this male pup has already sired 47 litters on public record, and his sire – 70. There would seem to be no reason to double up genes, already so prolific in a breed, in one litter of pups.
I will be glad to see some intervention by the clubs in regards to this kind of breeding.
Reply
I happen to know all about this litter. It was an accidental mating from two MRI scanned clear dogs. One of the offspring was subsequently scanned by the breeder and was also clear. All the puppies were placed in pet homes. I happen to know this breeder very well and she is very caring and health conscious. Please do not always see the worst in people.
Cavlady
Reply
It is a relief to hear this was an accidental mating but I will continue to use facts and not personal experiences to form my own opinions on how breeders are breeding and their merit in my mind. The overruse of the two studs mentioned as popular sires, shows disregard for how the popular sire syndrome adversely affects gene pools. The importance of population genetics in breeding decisions can not be stressed enough considering the current studies on diversity loss in breeds. The fact that both stud dogs were bred many, many times at an age much younger than suggested by the recommended MVD and SM health protocols in the breed (2.5 years) also tells me that the breeders involved here, all around, are not as health conscious as I would like. Of course we all have different measures and opinions and are free to make our own minds up.
Reply
Well Margaret. I hope you are happy now. Even someone who is more health conscious than most, who has had nearly all her dogs scanned and has all her litters eye and heart tested cannot escape this relentless critisism. What a great job you have done! You should be ashamed of yourself
I would also like to point out to Winnie that both these “popular” sires have clear hearts, one age six and the other over seven.
Reply
James M. LaFoe Reply:
May 29th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Well Sandra,i agree with Winnie. i have seen these mutts that inbreeding produces and i also feel that this should be stopped. jimmy2060@gmail.com
Reply
I believe now Margaret (Carter I believe) is being scapegoated unnecessarily. To be clear I have been aghast about the overuse of popular sires in breeds and the impact that they have on genetic diversity for a number of years now. I have also been forthright in my opinions about inbreeding and close breedings since my family and myself have had to deal with the health issues and early life loss of three inbred pets (two Champion sired), from different breeders.
That was a number of years ago and from there I found it to be of benefit to study pedigrees and lines of specific breeders long before I approach them for a pet.
When I began looking for a Cavalier four years ago I decided to also look for breeders following MVD(and now SM)protocol and performing appropriate health checks prior to breeding. As I intitially stated, I was looking through pedigrees at dogs that appealed, and to see who was and was not following protocols, when I found the inbred pair. This was actually long before Pedigree Dogs Exposed ever aired. Hat’s off to Jemima Harrison, though, for bringing these issues into the public domain.
Reply
Still got some hard core ‘bury your head in the sand’ defending the CKCS club to the bitter end.
Surely even they must see that it is time for change rather than closing ranks and expelling somebody for highlighting issues that need to be addressed!
Reply
winnie i suggest you buy a nice healthy mongrel and leave our lovely breed alone!!!!
Reply
Unfortunately mongrels are as unhealthy/healthy as any other dog and you know nothing of their health history or parentage. Go to a vets surgery waiting room and count how many dogs are pure breed and how many are pedigree.Mongrels get sick and bite as well. Plus they mate indiscriminately unlike pure breeds.
Reply
Oh yes, it is “our” lovely breed! so where is the assistance to help cover “our” lovely vet bills. My faithful dog would gladly trade her Grande Champion title, ribbons and trophies just to have a good heart valve. MVD and congestive heart failure is also “our” problem. Breeding protocols should be followed and not just considered a guideline. We at least owe that to “our” dogs that have given us their best.
Reply