Coi - Letter From Dogs Today

[Eceni]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

HI

as mentioned in the tooth/floating rib thread, this is the letter-reply by Malcolm Willis, geneticist to the worthy and dog-notables that was printed in last month's 'Dogs Today'.

The letter in question asked about the wisdom of breeding a CKCS back to her own maternal great-grandfather - a thing the dog's breeder had advised the owner to do. The owner, not unreasonably, was questioning the wisdom of this (one could ask why she was wanting to breed in the first place when the world is hardly short of Cavaliers, but that's another thread)

anyway, given that Malcolm WIllis is probably the best known of the canine geneticists in this country, I thought it was interesting to read his response - replicated here:

You are obviously looking ahead and are contemplating whether to in-breed/line-breed or not. In-breeding at high levels can create problems, but your in-breeding is not high. If you used this dog on your bitch in due course, then he will appear in generation 1 of the father's side and generation 4 of the mother's. That's an in-breeding level of about 6.3 per cent, which, in humans, is the highest in-breeding you can undertake. Most dogs are in-bred around 4 per cent and very few above 10 per cent (my emphasis).

 

In-breeding increases the risk of anomalies and it is important to ensure that the stud dog we are talking about does not carry any inherited problems. Certainly he should not exhibit any problems know to be inherited.

 

I cannot be precise about a dog I have not seen and a pedigree I have not read, but in the next couple of years it would be advisable to talk to as many experts in the breed as you can and find out as much as possible about the production of the potential sire. By the time you get round to mating your bitch, he will be middle-aged dog with plenty of information to be found. In-breeding is not automatically wrong, but neither is it inevitably safe.

This is a generalist magazine which is presumably why he didn't go into any depth on testing the bitch, or any of the breed-specific testing, but I thought the comment on the 4-10 per cent inbreeding was fairly implausible. I think you'd be hard pushed to find many pedigree dogs of any breed with an IoC that low - I suspect he's indulging in wishful thinking, but it's interesting that it's what he thinks it should be.

thoughts?

m

 

[Scudder]

I think you are right the faulty logic here is that it assumes the dogs were outcrossed to begin with. Take a line bred dog with similar sire lines back on his own great grandmother (who is probably also line bred) and you've exponentially increased the COI.

Kristen

 

[bertha]

When I started breeding many moons go, the classic mating was grandfather to grand daughter.

It was called line breeding. In breeding was something else, brother to sister, half brother to half sister, son to mother and so on.

Line breeding you have to have an outcross every so often to introduce new blood lines.

There are a lot of different opinions on breeding, as I no longer breed in some ways I find it a relief not having to find a suitable dog, go through rearing, choosing and finding homes, for puppies. There are so many people breeding whippets now, I no longer know all these new affixes, where the dogs come from or what lines.

Some of the problems we now seem to have in the breed must come from careless breeding.

I'll probably get shot down for saying that, but that is how it seems to me.

 

[Seraphina]

I try to breed phenotype to phenotype, while not using dog that has the same faults as my bitch. I thought that when one day I finally get around to calculate CoI it will be very low. However when I looked my dogs extended pedigree I was shocked how many times dogs were repeated past the 5th generations. Claudia has no repeats in the first 4 generations, but several in five, quite a lot in six generations. I have not completed the whole list of further generations as I had couple of dogs missing but i know that once we go past the 6th generations Dondalyo Statue is there over and over and over again, as are many other dogs . With Stella I have not got very far because I also needed to complete the pedigree, but I know that she has even less diverse genes.

However it is not just that many dogs appear many times, it is that there are very close matings over and over again for generations.

 

[nina]

When I started breeding many moons go, the classic mating was grandfather to grand daughter.
It was called line breeding. In breeding was something else, brother to sister, half brother to half sister, son to mother and so on.

Line breeding you have to have an outcross every so often to introduce new blood lines.

There are a lot of different opinions on breeding, as I no longer breed in some ways I find it a relief not having to find a suitable dog, go through rearing, choosing and finding homes, for puppies. There are so many people breeding whippets now, I no longer know all these new affixes, where the dogs come from or what lines.

Some of the problems we now seem to have in the breed must come from careless breeding.

I'll probably get shot down for saying that, but that is how it seems to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Have to say i totally agree with this, i was many years ago told granddaugter to grandfather was the best mating you could possibly do. I was also given the advice "out once & sharp in twice" always would work & have to say up until now this i have found to be correct :thumbsup:

 

[patsy]

When I started breeding many moons go, the classic mating was grandfather to grand daughter.
It was called line breeding. In breeding was something else, brother to sister, half brother to half sister, son to mother and so on.

Line breeding you have to have an outcross every so often to introduce new blood lines.

There are a lot of different opinions on breeding, as I no longer breed in some ways I find it a relief not having to find a suitable dog, go through rearing, choosing and finding homes, for puppies. There are so many people breeding whippets now, I no longer know all these new affixes, where the dogs come from or what lines.

Some of the problems we now seem to have in the breed must come from careless breeding.

I'll probably get shot down for saying that, but that is how it seems to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Have to say i totally agree with this, i was many years ago told granddaugter to grandfather was the best mating you could possibly do. I was also given the advice "out once & sharp in twice" always would work & have to say up until now this i have found to be correct :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I totally agree with Nina and Bertha, Bertha as you say you are not involved as such but those of who are don't know the breeders or many of the whippets that are being bred from these days. The same advise was given to me many years ago Nina by a famous breeder of Bulldogs who lived in our village, the sire on the dams side was one of the best mating you could do, it pulls out the strengths and also the weakness of your line. A very famous whippet lady once told me that when she started in the breed she was told by the famous breeder who she got her first whippet from, the only times she out crossed she got funnies, but being very new to it all at the time she did not dare to ask what the funnies were.

 

[Natalia]

HI
as mentioned in the tooth/floating rib thread, this is the letter-reply by Malcolm Willis, geneticist to the worthy and dog-notables that was printed in last month's 'Dogs Today'.

The letter in question asked about the wisdom of breeding a CKCS back to her own maternal great-grandfather - a thing the dog's breeder had advised the owner to do. The owner, not unreasonably, was questioning the wisdom of this (one could ask why she was wanting to breed in the first place when the world is hardly short of Cavaliers, but that's another thread)

anyway, given that Malcolm WIllis is probably the best known of the canine geneticists in this country, I thought it was interesting to read his response - replicated here:

You are obviously looking ahead and are contemplating whether to in-breed/line-breed or not. In-breeding at high levels can create problems, but your in-breeding is not high. If you used this dog on your bitch in due course, then he will appear in generation 1 of the father's  side and generation 4 of the mother's.  That's an in-breeding level of about 6.3 per cent, which, in humans, is the highest in-breeding you can undertake. Most dogs are in-bred around 4 per cent and very few above 10 per cent (my emphasis).

 

In-breeding increases the risk of anomalies and it is important to ensure that the stud dog we are talking about does not carry any inherited problems.  Certainly he should not exhibit any problems know to be inherited. 

 

I cannot be precise about a dog I have not seen and a pedigree I have not read, but in the next couple of years it would be advisable to talk to as many experts in the breed as you can and find out as much as possible about the production of the potential sire. By the time you get round to mating your bitch, he will be middle-aged dog with plenty of information to be found. In-breeding is not automatically wrong, but neither is it inevitably safe.

This is a generalist magazine which is presumably why he didn't go into any depth on testing the bitch, or any of the breed-specific testing, but I thought the comment on the 4-10 per cent inbreeding was fairly implausible.  I think you'd be hard pushed to find many pedigree dogs of any breed with an IoC that low - I suspect he's indulging in wishful thinking, but it's interesting that it's what he thinks it should be. 

thoughts?

m

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I'm afraid the comment on 4-10 per cent inbreeding is taken from the air. The only possible explanation for me is that he's talking about COI calculated in 4 or 5 generations, which can indeed give the wrong impression.

In the case mentioned in the letter, I think it's rather irresponsible to talk about the level of COI, as we know nothing about the bitch's pedigree. And, I would suspect, if the breeder advises inbreeding, it is something he/she routinely does, so we can expect the bitch is inbred herself. And in this case COI we are talking about, can be not 6,3%, but, for example 40%. In my opinion it's unwise to tell "go for inbreeding, if you don't know, what to do".

Please don't understand be in the wrong way. I'm not totally opposed to inbreeding. In fact, in my opinion, distant linebreeding made wisely, combined with outcrosses based on the type are the best way to keep the style and type and not to risk health and wellbeing of the dogs. I think there are situations, where even the matings like father to daughter can be understandable, if not done on a regular basis. However, I do think that you should know first WHY you are inbreeding or outcrossing and what you want to do in next generations with the offspring. In the situation mentioned in the letter we don't know if the breeder wants to use great-grand father to go back to the original line, to improve or strenghten the type, or maybe to have his favourite colour back in line or simply to have a young son/daughter of very important, probably old, dog. Some of the reason can be important, some not necessarily. In fact, if someone (the owner) is totally unsure what male he/she should use, I would suspect he/she doesn't have any breeding plan.

And, in such situation, I would rather advise not to breed at all until any plan is made. If it would not be possible, in my opinion it's far better to go for an outcross than for inbreeding. I don't believe any good effects can be achieved when someone doesn't know what he's breeding for, doesn't matter what's the breeding scheme. And it's better for the breed to maintain more diversity, so if he doesn't know what he's doing, he'd better not take the risk with health problem. That's why I think an outcross is a better solution.

 

[Seraphina]

Have to say i totally agree with this, i was many years ago told granddaugter to grandfather was the best mating you could possibly do.  I was also given the advice  "out once & sharp in twice" always would work & have to say up until now this i have found to be correct :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Do you have any rational explanation why is it that way?

 

[Eceni]

I am getting this scary sense of deja vu which wasn't the idea at all - however, since were here, the flip side of this particular argument is:

50 years ago, the practices outlined above WERE STATE OF THE ART and they worked. The gene pool - at least in whippets - was fairly large and fairly diverse and those advocating a practice that would be illegal in human breeding, were stating what they believed to be true and what they believed to be in the best interests of the breed.

However, 50 years on, we're in a position where the gene pool is no longer either large or diverse and the results can be seen across the board. There are threads in other parts of this forum from ordinary people having horrendous health problems with their dogs, all of which are of the kind known to be hereditary.

It's not only in the whippet - a lot of breeds are a lot worse off - but another 50 years of this will destroy the breed. If you read Natalia's posts in the last thread on genetics and inherited defects, I really do think she described in fair outline why reduction of genetic diversity leads to reduction of immunity and an increase in auto-immune diseases- apart from the various other known sequelae of raising the Coefficient of Inbreeding.

It doesn't really matter if you call it line-breeding or in-breeding. If you do it enough, so that, as Seraphina found, the same dog or bitch is repeated frequently in the higher orders of the pedigree, then the result will be a pup with a reduced genetic chance to be healthy.

so what I was trying to say last time, and will say again, is that all breeds need now to review the practices of the past, and to formulate new rules of thumb in an effort to maintain breed health.

It's not just in whippet breeding - in the next couple of decades, we're going to have to re-think everything we do from driving our cars to switching on our lights to how we feed and clothe ourselves (I'm reading 'Peak Everything' by Richard Heinberg and it makes sobering reading), but in this particular forum, in this particular field, the science is absolutely clear.

m

 

[jayp]

I am getting this scary sense of deja vu which wasn't the idea at all - however, since were here, the flip side of this particular argument is:
50 years ago, the practices outlined above WERE STATE OF THE ART and they worked.  The gene pool - at least in whippets - was fairly large and fairly diverse and those advocating a practice that would be illegal in human breeding, were stating what they believed to be true and what they believed to be in the best interests of the breed.

However, 50 years on, we're in a position where the gene pool is no longer either large or diverse and the results can be seen across the board.  There are threads in other parts of this forum from ordinary people having horrendous health problems with their dogs, all of which are of the kind known to be hereditary.

It's not only in the whippet - a lot of breeds are a lot worse off - but another 50 years of this will destroy the breed.  If you read Natalia's posts in the last thread on genetics and inherited defects, I really do think she described in fair outline why reduction of genetic diversity leads to reduction of immunity and an increase in auto-immune diseases- apart from the various other known sequelae of raising the Coefficient of Inbreeding. 

It doesn't really matter if you call it line-breeding or in-breeding. If you do it enough, so that, as Seraphina found, the same dog or bitch is repeated frequently in the higher orders of the pedigree, then the result will be a pup with a reduced genetic chance to be healthy.

so what I was trying to say last time, and will say again, is that all breeds need now to review the practices of the past, and to formulate new rules of thumb in an effort to maintain breed health.

It's not just in whippet breeding - in the next couple of decades, we're going to have to re-think everything we do from driving our cars to switching on our lights to how we feed and clothe ourselves (I'm reading 'Peak Everything' by Richard Heinberg and it makes sobering reading), but in this particular forum, in this particular field, the science is absolutely clear.

m

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Absolutely, sadly no-one is listening,

 

[Seraphina]

Unfortunately, many people prefer to believe all sorts of old wife’s tales especially if they are being perpetuated in various books. The same books, in which I found the following statements; (w00t)

Ø Tuck up: is too drawn up abdomen

Ø Pastern: The part of the front leg from the knee joint to the foot

Ø Elbow: the joint at the top of the leg where the front leg joins the lower part of

the shoulder

Ø Shoulder: The area on the back line at base of neck

Ø The points we seek to obtain in our stock are represented by dominant genes,

while the unwanted characteristics are produced by recessive genes.

Ø Black is recessive because it can be rapidly lost to the dominance of the

popular fawns and brindles.

And at last, but certainly not the least

“It is a common fallacy to suppose that such failings as loss of vigor, impotence, sterility, susceptibility to infection, loss of size can originate through inbreeding”

And some people will no doubt try to claim that Earth is flat and if your bitch gets mismated you can never again have purebred litter from her………

I just hope that at least some of the many people who read this thread will listen to the reason and will at least think about how close is too close, when breeding or looking for puppy to buy.

 

[Cartman]

My comment is: You must cross out to come back in.

I see breeders that only leave their back yard to use a dog they bred themselves anyway. What they end up with is the same style (type) of whippet they had 30 years ago. I wish them the best of luck.

Now to through a spanner in the works................ In my view, every generation of every breed is an upgrade of the last. Better quallity of food, vet care etc etc. helps the dog to improve. Classic examples are just get out some of your own pics of 30+ years ago. How many of them would show today. But yet they were great dogs in their time. They are just stepping stones to the next litter & top whippet.

If you dont go out & use dogs that have nothing to do with your lines you will not move forward. Forget if you hate the person who has something to offer. Ask what the end result would be.

I have had many litters & think I keep up to date in the style of dog. Line breeding is a big part of this just as much as knowing when to use something "special".

 

[Eceni]

Absolutely, sadly no-one is listening, 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I think they are... at least I hope so - and the off-list activity is huge, it's just that, barring a few brave souls, people don't feel able to say on-list what they're saying off-list. But it doesn't mean they aren't listening and learning and able to change the way things are done.

It only takes a few who have influence to understand what's going on and be able to argue from a position of informed intelligence to pull things back from the brink...

I have hope yet.

and thanks to all who have mailed off list.....

m

 

[nina]

Have to say i totally agree with this, i was many years ago told granddaugter to grandfather was the best mating you could possibly do.  I was also given the advice  "out once & sharp in twice" always would work & have to say up until now this i have found to be correct :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Do you have any rational explanation why is it that way?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I posted this on another thread but i will put it here too, many years ago when i came into the world of dog showing i was fortunate enough to be taken under the wing of a very great lady who had been breeding for many many years & had established fantastic blood lines in several different breeds. She was a real dyed in the wool dog person & her knowledge was excetional as were here dogs.

She once told me regarding breeding that to establish a good line she felt the best procedure was to go "out" once & then fairly tightly back in twice. By doing this she kept her type but also regained some of the things that she felt by continually line breeding she would lose like maybe pigment etc.

This may not be the "rational explanation" you were looking for but i can only say that it definitely worked for her & she had many beautiful Champions in several different breeds.

 

[Eceni]

I posted this on another thread but i will put it here too, many years ago when i came into the world of dog showing i was fortunate enough to be taken under the wing of a very great lady who had been breeding for many many years & had established fantastic blood lines in several different breeds. She was a real dyed in the wool dog person & her knowledge was excetional as were here dogs.
She once told me regarding breeding that to establish a good line she felt the best procedure was to go "out" once & then fairly tightly back in twice. By doing this she kept her type but also regained some of the things that she felt by continually line breeding she would lose like maybe pigment etc.

This may not be the "rational explanation" you were looking for but i can only say that it definitely worked for her & she had many beautiful Champions in several different breeds.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

and now that this has been practised for many generations, and now that science can explore genetics to a greater extent, it's time to let go of the mores of the previous generations - which will destroy the breed if continued for too much longer and find new methods of practice.

This is the point of this thread. Those ways were fine in the old days, they were cutting edge and clever. They have been practised too long and are no longer suitable. In this, as in just about every other aspect of our existence, it's time to let go of the past and evolve something new if the breed (and all breeds ) is to survive.

manda scott

 

[nina]

When I started breeding many moons go, the classic mating was grandfather to grand daughter.
It was called line breeding. In breeding was something else, brother to sister, half brother to half sister, son to mother and so on.

Line breeding you have to have an outcross every so often to introduce new blood lines.

There are a lot of different opinions on breeding, as I no longer breed in some ways I find it a relief not having to find a suitable dog, go through rearing, choosing and finding homes, for puppies. There are so many people breeding whippets now, I no longer know all these new affixes, where the dogs come from or what lines.

Some of the problems we now seem to have in the breed must come from careless breeding.

I'll probably get shot down for saying that, but that is how it seems to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Have to say i totally agree with this, i was many years ago told granddaugter to grandfather was the best mating you could possibly do. I was also given the advice "out once & sharp in twice" always would work & have to say up until now this i have found to be correct :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I totally agree with Nina and Bertha, Bertha as you say you are not involved as such but those of who are don't know the breeders or many of the whippets that are being bred from these days. The same advise was given to me many years ago Nina by a famous breeder of Bulldogs who lived in our village, the sire on the dams side was one of the best mating you could do, it pulls out the strengths and also the weakness of your line. A very famous whippet lady once told me that when she started in the breed she was told by the famous breeder who she got her first whippet from, the only times she out crossed she got funnies, but being very new to it all at the time she did not dare to ask what the funnies were.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Yes i totally agree with you Patsy & i have to say i have found this to be 100 per cent correct. I think that a lot of the doyens of many breeds established their lines in this way & produced many beautiful Champions whom without we wouldnt have some of the lovely dogs that we have today, so just for me personally & i'm sure many will disagree but i am of the thinking that if it aint broke dont fix it, but just my opinion alone

 

[Eceni]

Yes i totally agree with you Patsy & i have to say i have found this to be 100 per cent correct. I think that a lot of the doyens of many breeds established their lines in this way & produced many beautiful Champions whom without we wouldnt have some of the lovely dogs that we have today, so just for me personally & i'm sure many will disagree but i am of the thinking that if it aint broke dont fix it, but just my opinion alone 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

But it is broke, and it badly needs fixing - that's the point....

I agree if all you're after is to breed champions, you might get away with it, but the wastage is going to be higher with every generation and the dogs - and the owners who love them - are going to suffer.

When I was a vet, I formulated two 'laws' of veterinary medicine (these are entirely my own opinion, not scientific studies, you understand)

the first was Scott's First Law of Veterinary Medicine which states that: '99% of the population should be forcibly prevented from owning anything with eyelashes.'

the second was Scott's First Law of Veterinary Karma which states that: 'Every breeder of every animal shall live through every life of every puppy/kitten/piglet/calf/whatever that they have ever bred until all possible breeding karma is exhausted.'

I can't prove this, of course, and clearly the breeders of farmed pigs are in a lot more trouble than you are (or, indeed, the breeders of bulldogs, GSDs or a number of other obvious breeds)

- but if you were going to be reincarnated as every one of your pups, I suspect you'd be a lot more careful about their not having, say, monthly meningitis attacks that leave them in screaming pain for 48 hours at a time, or auto-immune arthritis that cripples them at a young age and leads to unending pain, or mitral valve insufficiency, or cardica arrythmias of the kind seen by our friend in Australia (which, now that I've seen the ECG read-out, doesn't sound like a sinus arrythmia at all)... or anything else that the 'tried and tested' system has produced

Read back through the last thread on genetics. Raising the CoI reduces exponentially the ability to withstand infection and increases the incidence of auto-immune disease.

this *can't* be just about producing champions who have good fronts and carry their ears correctly. It has to be about taking care of the breed and producing healthy dogs of good temperament.

m

 

[patsy]

Absolutely, sadly no-one is listening, 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I think they are... at least I hope so - and the off-list activity is huge, it's just that, barring a few brave souls, people don't feel able to say on-list what they're saying off-list. But it doesn't mean they aren't listening and learning and able to change the way things are done.

It only takes a few who have influence to understand what's going on and be able to argue from a position of informed intelligence to pull things back from the brink...

I have hope yet.

and thanks to all who have mailed off list.....

m

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Eceni I totally agree with Nina, many breeders have put many years of dedication into the whippet breed, breeding sound healthy beautiful dogs, if it had not been for sound line breeding in the past we would not have what we have today.

On the other hand if breeders have run into problems and gone blindly on do not tar us all with the same brush. Whatever you might think we do all have the breed at heart and have enough experience to be able to carry on improving the breed. I for one will not listen to anyone who has never had any input into the breed. I have a wonderful vet, he says you are a dog breeder I am a vet, but for years he has never seen any of my dogs except for inoculation, old age or maybe a sting or injury.

 

[patsy]

Yes i totally agree with you Patsy & i have to say i have found this to be 100 per cent correct. I think that a lot of the doyens of many breeds established their lines in this way & produced many beautiful Champions whom without we wouldnt have some of the lovely dogs that we have today, so just for me personally & i'm sure many will disagree but i am of the thinking that if it aint broke dont fix it, but just my opinion alone 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

But it is broke, and it badly needs fixing - that's the point....

I agree if all you're after is to breed champions, you might get away with it, but the wastage is going to be higher with every generation and the dogs - and the owners who love them - are going to suffer.

When I was a vet, I formulated two 'laws' of veterinary medicine (these are entirely my own opinion, not scientific studies, you understand)

the first was Scott's First Law of Veterinary Medicine which states that: '99% of the population should be forcibly prevented from owning anything with eyelashes.'

the second was Scott's First Law of Veterinary Karma which states that: 'Every breeder of every animal shall live through every life of every puppy/kitten/piglet/calf/whatever that they have ever bred until all possible breeding karma is exhausted.'

I can't prove this, of course, and clearly the breeders of farmed pigs are in a lot more trouble than you are (or, indeed, the breeders of bulldogs, GSDs or a number of other obvious breeds)

- but if you were going to be reincarnated as every one of your pups, I suspect you'd be a lot more careful about their not having, say, monthly meningitis attacks that leave them in screaming pain for 48 hours at a time, or auto-immune arthritis that cripples them at a young age and leads to unending pain, or mitral valve insufficiency, or cardica arrythmias of the kind seen by our friend in Australia (which, now that I've seen the ECG read-out, doesn't sound like a sinus arrythmia at all)... or anything else that the 'tried and tested' system has produced

Read back through the last thread on genetics. Raising the CoI reduces exponentially the ability to withstand infection and increases the incidence of auto-immune disease.

this *can't* be just about producing champions who have good fronts and carry their ears correctly. It has to be about taking care of the breed and producing healthy dogs of good temperament.

m

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

No Eceni nothing to do with producing champions sound healthy whippets first, because the majority of most peoples litters go into pet homes, of course if the chosen puppy is good enough to become a champion in a very strong breed and believe me it is, THAT IS THE ICING ON THE CAKE.

In the last thread a lot of damage was done to our wonderful breed, and friendships of many years standing. In all my forty years in the breed we have never had such unrest.

 

[nina]

Yes i totally agree with you Patsy & i have to say i have found this to be 100 per cent correct. I think that a lot of the doyens of many breeds established their lines in this way & produced many beautiful Champions whom without we wouldnt have some of the lovely dogs that we have today, so just for me personally & i'm sure many will disagree but i am of the thinking that if it aint broke dont fix it, but just my opinion alone 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

But it is broke, and it badly needs fixing - that's the point....

I agree if all you're after is to breed champions, you might get away with it, but the wastage is going to be higher with every generation and the dogs - and the owners who love them - are going to suffer.

When I was a vet, I formulated two 'laws' of veterinary medicine (these are entirely my own opinion, not scientific studies, you understand)

the first was Scott's First Law of Veterinary Medicine which states that: '99% of the population should be forcibly prevented from owning anything with eyelashes.'

the second was Scott's First Law of Veterinary Karma which states that: 'Every breeder of every animal shall live through every life of every puppy/kitten/piglet/calf/whatever that they have ever bred until all possible breeding karma is exhausted.'

I can't prove this, of course, and clearly the breeders of farmed pigs are in a lot more trouble than you are (or, indeed, the breeders of bulldogs, GSDs or a number of other obvious breeds)

- but if you were going to be reincarnated as every one of your pups, I suspect you'd be a lot more careful about their not having, say, monthly meningitis attacks that leave them in screaming pain for 48 hours at a time, or auto-immune arthritis that cripples them at a young age and leads to unending pain, or mitral valve insufficiency, or cardica arrythmias of the kind seen by our friend in Australia (which, now that I've seen the ECG read-out, doesn't sound like a sinus arrythmia at all)... or anything else that the 'tried and tested' system has produced

Read back through the last thread on genetics. Raising the CoI reduces exponentially the ability to withstand infection and increases the incidence of auto-immune disease.

this *can't* be just about producing champions who have good fronts and carry their ears correctly. It has to be about taking care of the breed and producing healthy dogs of good temperament.

m

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

When you say it is broke, i'm not quite sure as to what you mean as i for one do not think the breed (whippets) is in such a dire state health wise at all.

Sorry but this is my personal opinion & in comparison to many other breeds that i am actively involved with i would say whippets are by far the healthiest.

Yes health issues do crop up now & again BUT not to the extent that the breed is about to become a walking disaster.

I do not beleive either that line breeding if done correctly & with much thought working of course with what you know to be healthy animals & healthy animals throughout the lines will bring about the downfall of the breed.

Breeding to just breed Champions of course is not the only criteria, that is obvious, a good sound healthy all round specimen is what most breeders would be striving for one would hope.