Culling - Page 2

Gotta hand it to you Geordie, you have a knack for keeping clear of controversial topics...

NOT!

With that said, I think controversial topics are the most interesting, if people can keep their wits about them and not let their feelings overwhelm their thinking and slip into self-righteous rants, one way or another.

Culling by placement, that is placing less desirable or undesirable pups in settings where they are less likely to be bred and reproduce, seems like a pretty humane approach to protecting the breed from the influence of less than stellar, or even outright horrible, specimens of the breed.  While there are many considerations that can be brought up and discussed about this approach, one that is of particular concern and interest to me is the widespread practice of placing temperamentally weak pups in "pet homes".  I've got to wonder how often and with what frequency trusting buyers receive a pup who is somewhat nervy, or even an outright nervebag, with little idea or understanding that they have been a victim of "culling by placement".  I'm pretty sure that no breeders who you will find here would ever even consider presenting a pup for being anything other than what it actually is.  On second thought I can't really guarantee that is the case, but it is very much a problem that both breeders and buyers have to be aware of and confront.  I see no simple or clear-cut solution to this problem, but then again, what some others can see with perfect clarity sometimes is colored by many shades of gray to me.

SteveO

Mobjack, I'm with you. If an animal will not have a good quality of life without serious medical intervention, put it down. The example you gave happens all the time. Those people are perceived as being the real animal lovers, but I'm not sure what she did for that pup was in its best interest. There is a reason some pups are destined to die at birth, before, or shortly after. We don't always understand those reasons, but I don't think its our place to question them.

If we're trying to improve a breed, how can we help weak pups survive to reproduce? I personally do not help puppies. I do not feed puppies, and I do not move pushy pups so weak ones can eat. Actually, I have to be honest and say I have never had occasion to do so w/the litters I've had; there were no pups who weren't pushy enough to get as much food as they needed/wanted. BUT- I was prepared each time to NOT intervene. If the bitch thinks there's something wrong with the pup and ignores it, so would I. I know my dogs and trust them. If they had any screws even a half a turn loose, I wouldn't be breeding them at all, so why would I second guess their decisions made based on instinct and nature instead of mine being made by human (female no less!) emotion?

Geordie, if you're only wanting to discuss the culling by show breeders who are probably culling the only structurally sound pups in the litter (joking, kind of), then that's another ballgame, and I think it's sick, only because of WHY they're culling. The practice of culling has to be involved in the practice of breeding, as close to nature's standards as possible.

@Jenn

Que Pasa, Amiga?

It appears that cyber-fate has us again  in close proximity with each other and having participated in a most construcitve dialog with you on another matter recently, which I didn't really anticipate, I wonder if you would mind if I ask a question of you on this topic.

As I stated above, of particular concern to me is the practice of "culling by placement" of temperamentally weak pups.  While I am sure that it is the goal and desire of breeders not to produce "somewhat nervy" pups, have you considered how you would deal with that eventuallity?  In truth, when I have considered the responsibilities that come with breeding this is one of the most difficult situations that I think that a breeder would have to confront and appropriately deal with.  Speaking for myself, I would not take a "somewhat nervy" pup even if it were offered to me for free, no matter how exemplary it was in every other way.  I question how I could with clear conscience sell, or even give away, a pup that under no circumstance I would want myself.

It is my understanding  that a breeder who has bred enough litters is eventually going to breed some pups who fall into this temperamental category.  Like hip dysplacia, the incidence of it's manifestation can be reduced but not entirely eliminated.

Is it more ethical or just to cull pups either by placement or deliberate termination of it's life?  And if "culled by placement", to whom?

Your thoughts would be appreciated as I imagine that you have already given this quite a bit of thought.

And no, I am not trying to set you up for a "pissing contest".   I can almost guarantee that I will not challenge what your thoughts are on this in any way.  It is a subject of particular concern and interest to me and hopefully other breeders will share their thoughts as well.

Peace

SteveO

Atta' Boy, Moderator!!!!

I happened to catch that deleted comment before you sent it to the trash can, it's deserved destiny and fate.

Like the Wise Men say, "In All Things, Moderation..."

Keep Laughin'

SteveO

Edited to add:

Whoops!  I guess this is a bit off topic too.
Hopefully you will let it stand to lend a little public support to your efforts!

Jenni,
Yeah, I think people have good intentions but let their hearts overrule good sense. I'll help a bitch with a huge litter by supplemental feeding but if she rejects a pup constantly and will not accept it, she's got a reason.

I see it all the time and some of them are really pathetic. Just put the poor animal down. I don't know, maybe they're just to selfish to do that.

Steve, oh you're so right about nerve bags. I have a rule with a basketcase dog. It has a month to settle in with me to get comfortable and used to the routine. I'll do a bit of obedience training and a lot of handling during that time and really try to figure out what's in the dog's head. After a month, rehab starts. If after one month of rehab there is no progress, the animal is put down. It's not fair to the animal. I wouldn't want to live that way, scared of my own shadow. Some get better, some don't. After a month or so of rehab I'll know if that dog can be safely put with the average Joe Blow, wife and 2.5 kids. A basketcase with severe health problems like HD requiring surgery, I put them down. Again, not fair to the dog to put them through that.

Hey Mobjack!

Thanks very much for speaking up on what I know might be perceived as a very sensitive issue best not addressed. 

Hopefully your forthright treatment of this issue will inspire others to make their thoughts known, whether in line with yours or not.  I suppose that for some there might be some sense of safety by remaining silent.  Props to you for stepping up to the plate!

SteveO

LOL Sangreinu, I can see your proclamation from the chair! 

Excellent questions, Steve O.  I personally see nothing wrong with culling.  I am not a believer in the canine right to lifer movement,  and we are talking about dogs not humans.  They are not the same, though the PETA nuts are doing everything they can to play to emotions, and blur the lines.   Breeders are faced with difficult choices, the good ones know when to cull and how to cull humanely.   The one thing I'm not going to do is tell them their business or judge them for  keeping to the highest standards.

LOL! Thanks Steve.

I have no problems expressing my opinion on that issue. I don't have a problem telling idiotic owners that they're stupid and caused all their own problems either.