2-2 Line/In breeding - Page 6

Unfortunately there are not enough posters here to get a better idea of how many would consider and make a very close inbreed. Of these few here on this thread it is clear that some will make this kind of mating, however many more is something that we will never know. The damage to the breed as a whole will never be known because of the selfishness of the few who want to disregard the rules.

The WUSV and the SV are moving in the right direction for the betterment of the Breed by refusing to register any dogs within the close inbreed that they have set out.

Mackenzie

Care to elaborate on the "selfishness of the few who want to disregard the rules," Mackenzie?

Which rules, also? I mean, AKC has no rules. Period. The lack of rules is no better than too many rules, imo. Again, it lands on the individual to decide what is right for them and their dogs.

Apparently, the breeding I did in February will be "against the rules" by early next year. Am I "selfish" and did I "disregard the rules," Mackenzie? It was perfectly acceptable when I did it, legal schmegal. Was I selfish then, or will I only be selfish next year when it's against the rules? :-) I am being a little silly but I am serious in that I want to understand where the "selfish" comes in when doing a 3,2, etc. I would like clarification on who is responsible for the damage to the breed (in this thread, as you used it to say it's clear some will make this kind of mating).

Haven't 1-2's and such ALWAYS gone on under a veil and those dogs were simply not registered, often, and used down the road after ruthless culling? I don't think lack of registration is going to be a huge deterrent to the type breeder who employs these breeding tactics, from what I have seen in my relatively short time in the breed (15 years).

And it was my understanding that plenty of breeds and breeders have only established type and specific traits through this type of breeding.
Agreed , it should not be path one sets to follow through out their breeding program,
But you must be willing to step outsideof the box also.
When I did my tight breeding of my male who by the way has a pedigree that is not to shabby the other side of the female s pedigree wasa total outcross and my "plan" was to breed back to the SL pedigree with an added outcross that would unite lines several generations back
Which I got to any way just took a few more years to get here.
I didn't t try this because I had nothing better to do than to try something that Dr Frankenstein would approve of or to add some unstable dogs to my household
I did it to enhance the dogs I have now
but I m not really sure I can get dogs better than the ones I have now.
And I have the Parrish's and Bullingers before me to thank for that

If not wanting to follow SV for the past 20 years in many things is selfish, I guess you have to include me as selfish.

ND you see a lot more dogs looking deformed coming directly out from the SV regulated breeding programs, followed to the T;
Than you will ever see coming from me
I myself think some of the Show line dogs coming out and about, is shameful
And it is not the American ones either it is those that the SV regulates.
I am not one of the anti show line dogs either I used to truly admire them
I think I got my boy Duke just in the nick of time

Jenni78 - AKC has no rules ? What sort of Club has NO Rules? That means NO Breed Standard. No hip and elbow dysplasia rules. NO Rules covering registration or anything else. Are you sure that there are no rules ? I do not believe you.

The Show Lines in Germany changed radically during the 1990’s because of close inbreeding. The President of the day wanted to develop the breed to focus on two males, Zamb v d Wienerau and Jeck v Noricum both having the same sire. The result of this inbreed can be seen today in some of the problems. The breed also went through a period of false pedigrees which meant the Breeders did not realise exactly what they were breeding with when using these males to females who were possibly containing the same lines behind them. All of this is, of course, before you came into the breed. My own experience began in 1970 which is a bit before your time.

The problem of close inbreeding is being addressed by the WUSV and the SV at this time having recognised the undesirable problems. Close inbreeding breeds more of the same and continues to stamp the bad points in as well. I am sure that with fifteen years experience you will know this. I leave it to the Readers to make their own choices regarding selfishness in ignoring the past.

I have no more to say on this post with so few other contributors.

Mackenzie

one have to ask the question if the dogs bred against the rules really are having more (health) problems than the ones bred  following the rules

I think not

inbreeding only exposes problems that are already there geneticly, so other combinations done with same dogs will have also chance to produce same problems

with inbreeding one cane "out "these problems and eliminate them from breedingprogram

 

Duke makes an excellent point about inbreeding exposing problems that are already there, sooooo if some ten years ago( really more than twenty but I have been harping on this for ten on this forum), the breeders, breed warden, breed competitors, in German SV saw the negative result of this inbreeding from the stock of Zamp/ Jeck; why have they not infused genetic diversity into those lines to reverse the situation?????? ( The SV is controlled by these SL breeders and has been for years)
I do not see their path of direction as some shining light that if I don't follow the breed will suffer.....maybe thirty years ago they had things right, but now.....sorry, I have to remain selfish.

I gave my views on 2-2, and the pros/cons, it has its place, but very seldom should be employed.

"Exposing problems" = doubling up recessives
Fore sure interesting, sometimes even helpful, but afterwards?
What do you learn out of this?

1. some "negatives" show up
As a breeder you surely don´t use this dog for breeding, in case it´s a trait you don´t want to pass on ( let´s say any genetic health problem ), but in this case you have not only to skip the whole litter ( a recessive only shows in case the dog got it from both parents, and how will you know - it´s a 50/50 out of sire, out of dam ), but sire and dam, too.

2. some "positives" show up
As a breeder you surely will use this dog for breeding, in case it´s a trait you want to pass on, but what about the next generation? You´d either need to inbreed again ( logically best choice would be a brother/sister mating) to manifest these traits, because by doing an outcross you would be back to square one.

Looking forward this only works with at least 4 strains of lines selected for the same traits, pretty difficult for a single "dog" breeder, but works well for the meat industry.

My personal thought : A recessive only shows up in case it´s doubled, that said when I use sire/dam already showing the traits, I want to breed for, although not related, I don´t need to inbreed. The chances will be the same.

Just for the record: My first GSD was the result of a brother/sister mating, no pedigrees ( no wonder ), overall a very good dog.

Mackenzie, I saw (on TV) a dog that was rescued from a puppy mill that had no lower jaw and no control of her back legs. Her puppies were registered with the AKC, and the week before she was rescued, the puppy mill's facility was inspected by the AKC and passed.

 

No. The AKC doesn't have any breeding rules besides "are the parents registered?"