Hi Tracey,

Oh sure, you're bound to see trends and fads in the show ring.  One type or color will win more and become more popular in the ring.  However, show breeders make up such a small percentage of the breeding population.  I don't think it will really have much influence, or do much harm, to the breed as a whole.  There will still be plenty of people breeding their version of the rat terrier.  They will still have something to offer to everyone.

Doreen

Hi Ashley,

Yes, there are some people who still work/hunt their dogs, but the vast majority of today's population does not.  That is the point I was trying to make.

Doreen

 Did I just watch a movie and take it as a literal bible? No. Am I completely ignorant in the issue of purebred dogs? No.
 Have I seen dog shows, and have I talked to show breeders? Yes. Dog shows are fun events, and I like to take pictures of the dogs. I have been looking into this subject. Rest assured, I do some research on a subject before I form an opinion on it.

 I would say the video is a question of animal welfare, not rights. Animal rights groups look for the extermination of all domestic animals and aim to cut off all human contact with all animals. Animal welfare is simple the concern for the welfare of the animals. Just because someone questions the kennel club and their views doesn't mean they hate purebred dogs. Many people simply just don't agree with how the KC handles the dogs. The person who created the video, Jemima Harrison, made another movie about dogs and their ability to smell cancer.
 

No, I don't agree with everything in it...I wish they had interviewed a responsible breeder, it blurred the line between human taboo and breeding at points, and I couldn't help but roll my eyes at the eugenisist part. But it did raise an important fact; not ALL KC/show breeders breed responsibly. Most people seem to think, "Well, this breeder shows dogs, and is part of so-and-so registry, so this person must be a responsible breeder, and this puppy must of come from such a person," Not true all the time. You can buy a registered dog at a pet store. I can see how this video would upset responsible breeders, since yes, it did give a very biased view, but has anyone ever seen a media 'documentary' that hasn't?
 The breed club may write the standard, but the AKC chooses who the parent club will be. Also, many of the standards were developed long ago before people were aware of genetic defects and the physical liabilities of some extremes.

 I never said there shouldn't be a breed standard. And even if there wasn't, the dog's wouldn't revert back to pariah dogs. Hundreds of years ago, before the Kennel Club came to be, many breeds could be identified easily by their fanciers. And most don't have much trouble today with identifying purebreds. Most millers and BYBs don't diverge from the standard...instead they stick with it (to an extent) because people like wolf-like huskies and black labs, and that's what they'll pay for (with the exception of whatever 50 new 'oodlypoo' mixes they churn out every year) You'd still have the same breeds, you'd just have not-so-dog-savvy people arguing over weather a lab was a retriever, or over what an Akita is...which isn't a good thing either.

 Instead, I believe there needs to be MORE to the standard than just looks. There should be a good description of the character for ALL the breeds. The AKC standard for the German shepherd has a good, long description of how the dog should act, and states that any dog that attempts to bite the judge should be disqualified. You look at the description for the temperament of the Chinese Crested, and literally, all it says is 'Gay and alert'.

 And how else to test the dog's temperament more accurately than to let it perform the task that is was bred to perform? Obviously there are exceptions to those breeds bred for bull baiting, fighting, ect, and those bred strictly for companionship. But with most breeds, why on earth would anyone want to throw the breed's character aside? Those herding dogs...the border collie and Australian shepherd among them...have a very fierce drive to do whatever task it is put to, being it flyball, agility, or it's original task. That came from the fact that the original creators of the breed bred them that way, because those dogs HAD to have that drive and energy to work. Those tenacious, absurd terriers with so much attitude and opinion...they had to have that in order to stick their head down a dark hole and come face to face with a large rodent, a big feat for a small dog. The quiet, serene attitude of sight hounds, the nonsensical glee that a lab or cocker has, all these were traits bred into the dogs by their founders because they had to have these characteristics to do their job. Why should we ignore the very being of the breed and 'dum down' their working drive'? Because some people do not have the time to care for an energetic dog, and many simply don't want the time? What about everyone else who loves the breed because of it's character? Why rob them of their breed's being? There are plenty of breeds that have low energy needs and are simply great companions, and most breeds, even working breeds, can live in an urban environment provided their owners spend enough time and energy on them. If we get away from breeding for function, we will loose the very core of the breed, and soon all breeds will have the same 'nice' and 'complacent' attitude. Looking for a breed of dog would simply be reduced to picking what breed you think looks good. Most educated dog owners don't choose a terrier because they have a 'rat infested home' or 'flocks of sheep'...they choose the breed because they don't just like the look, but the temperament works out for them. Cuddly under-your-feet lap dogs are nice, but not everyone wants one. And there should be a defined, well written standard for the breed's temperament, since, after all..."Breeding without the standard is like giving someone a hammer, nails, and lumber and telling them to build a house.  They might build something that resembles a house, but would you want to live in it?"
 

And no, many of the standards today are not the same as they were long ago. Most breeds have changed in some way, though, usually, not to a point were they cannot do their job. However, some have. The fox terrier is now to large to go after fox. (and no, "European" red fox are in general no larger than "American" red fox, they're the same species) When was the last time anyone ever saw a show line German shepherd doing police work? There may be some, but it's a relitively few number (depending on the breed you're talking about) And if these dogs really are cut out for their work, if they still have the strong instinct to do so, then how come many breeds have splintered into 'show' and 'working' groups? They may be the same for the most part, but how come there are some pretty distinct differences in the two groups? Why has the original Jack Russell splintered into 'Jack Russells' and 'Parson Russells'.  (Ironically, the 'Russell Terrier' is now in the AKC's FSS) If the AKC promotes the working dogs so much -and if almost no one works their dogs today- then why did most of the Border Collie people, those who own Jack Russells and Australian Shepherds....why did many of their fanciers put up such a fuss when the AKC wanted to recognize their breeds?
 

Only 6% of American Border Collies are AKC registered...this puts those Border Collie lines in serious risk. The working folks may be partly to blame for the splintering, but not so much as the registry. After all, many of the breeders haven't "closed their stud book", like the AKC has. Which brings up another point...why have they closed the stud books? Why not allow other dogs from other countries and registries in? If they're worried about mixed breeds entering the registry, then set up a list of requirements. They did that for the Basenji - and I understand it might be harder for most other breeds to do so...and they do allow some breeds from outside registries in, why not do so for the other breeds? The reason why we have so many genetic faults is because of a relatively few number of breeders breeding from a small amount of dogs, with registries generally keeping to themselves and only to the dogs within that registry. The Saluki Club of America, an AKC registered club, has an article about outcrossing and closed stud books, were it admits that closed stud books aren't such a good idea....

http://www.salukiclub.org/SalukiHealth/salukhealth-akcgenepool.html

 I'm positive -no, I know- that there are AKC breeders out there doing the right thing, or trying to. The KC in general has such a wide variety of people in it that it's impossible to imply that ALL KC/AKC breeders are bad, or that ALL of them are responsible. There are people that are trying to open the studbooks, and even taking a look at outcrossing, but it's pretty hard to do so, since the AKC requires a full membership vote. And the amount of people trying to stop progress may be small (again, usually depending on the breed) but it's enough.
 Adding unrelated dogs to a line, and even different breeds (on a extremely rare occasion) needs to be done. You cannot, cannot breed from a small amount of dogs and not expect problems. Even if you do not directly inbreed, you're still going to end up breeding in similar genes eventually.
 

And yes, there are irresponsible show breeders out there. Why do they inbreed sick dogs? Why do athletes take steroids? Because they want to win. It happens in every other 'sport' and occupation...were the participant looses all interest in the activity itself and attains a 'win win' attitude...why wouldn't it happen in the dog show world? It isn't uncommon for people who breed working/hunting dogs to abuse their dogs (which doesn't really make much sense either) The KC should step up and and, I believe, should take a more forceful attitude toward genetic testing. No, you shouldn't disqualify every single genetic disease and...you can't. Breeding only perfectly healthy dogs can limit the gene pool further, and bring out new genetic diseases that no one was aware of before, and you do need to give breeders same 'space' to breed. However, I do believe they should have mandatory testing, and disqualify a few genetic diseases. It will be some time before you can get rid of even some genetic defects to a point were they become rare...a defect may be so common in a breed that it would be impossible to not use affected dogs. But how can mandatory testing hurt? Responsible breeders do it anyway. The KC's argument is, "well, some breeders will just get upset and turn away from the KC". I say let them. Why would any club, or any good breeder, want to be affiliated with these people?
 

The AKC, and show breeders in general are not the 'Future of the breed'. They're just a part of the breed in a world full of other registries and breeders breeding for different causes. The AKC is not the be-all and end-all for a breed as some might believe, it's just another club in a world full of breed clubs.
 

I don't hate the AKC, or the KC, or purebred dogs (I actually prefer purebreds....healthy purebreds) and I'm sure the people who made this movie don't. I enjoy seeing dog shows and seeing all the different dogs. I just think the clubs can do better. A lot better. Yes, the show community was to blame for today's purebred defects...they just didn't have the genetic know-how to breed properly. (although it doesn't take an expert to look at a dachshund's little legs and think that it's going to have trouble later on) You can't blame the entire show community of today, since many are doing the right thing. However, the ones that are inbreeding and breeding unsound dogs (and they are out there) are to blame just as much as BYBs and millers...not only do they limit there own lines' gene pool, but they effect the entire breed...what good breeder would want to add a badly bred dog to their lines?
 

No, it will never be perfect, but it can be better. Add health, character, and working ability to the breed standard, and require a good score in each area to dub a dog a champion. You can't just do this at a conformation show...a judge can pick out physical defects, but they can't see the underlying genetic problems, and I don't expect them to know every single dog in the show. Make health testing mandatory, and change some standards to at least the point were it lowers the risk of getting a default significantly. Change the standards back to were they can work properly-you won't even have to change all of the standards, and the ones you will change won't need to change so much. And open the stud books...it won't hurt as much as one would think.

I see a lot of people on these type of boards,,, with PET dogs,, most often just repeat stuff they have seen on line or in a tv show,,, or even heard someone else say about a tv show. It frustrates me just a tiny bit.

Many in this thread have even said,,, "I did not watch the videos, but I agree with them".... Is that a reasonable statement.

I see Doreen questioning may posters that criticise show dogs and showing asking if those critics have ever actually owned a show dog or been to a show... THAT is a VERY good question. The answers of,, "No, but we have heard about them"... would not surprise me.

Myself and my wife DO show,,,, and we are proud of our dogs and their wins... but we are not show breeders,,,, we are breeders of Rat Terriers.... and we LOVE them.

Some we show,,, some we sell to breeders like Doreen to love and show... some we sell to pet homes,,, never to see a show ring but to be loved just as much as the very best grand champion in the country.

These are ALL Rat Terriers.

And the people against inbreeding and line breeding,,,, How do you think Rat Terriers got here,,,, did they just fall out of the sky?

Yes there are stupid breeders,,, many of them sold you people pet rat terriers.... They told you "we do not care about breeders,, or show rings",,, we just make happy healthy puppies to sell"..... PLEASE think on that statement alone....

"Make puppies to sell"... think on that. How do they know their dogs are healthy?? Think on that. Think on why they avoid show rings and judges,,, Think on why they avoid health testing.

Myself and my wife,, test EVERY one of our dogs before they are bred,,, we x-ray hips, elbows etc,, we have their hearts and knees checked. Have a look at our web pages,, look at the testing,, and then come back and tell me that today's breeders do not care about  health.

I repeat,, maybe the breeders that some of you got your dogs from do not care but the genuine breeders and showers DO care,,, and they prove it with every show weekend,, gallons of gas, show fees, motels... it all adds up,,,, and we get a ribbon worth a dollar or two,,,, but to us,, proving our dogs health and soundness is priceless. A lot of the time we give those ribbons back to the club. Isn't that strange for people that ONLY care about winning.

The person that said that show people do not care about health or temperament..... PLEASE explain that.

I best shut up now while I am still polite... lol

My dogs can talk for me.. go look,,, look at Doreen's baby fire... Look at other breeders,,, GOOD breeders... write me and I will point some out.

Ask them what they spend each year showing their dogs,, and how much they spend on testing.

The ask some of your friends,, why they refuse to pay more than $75.00 for a Rat Terrier... Where is their concern for healt testing, quality and temperament when they buy their own dogs... lol

Do not debate things because of what you see in a one sided TV show,,, Look around you,, attend a show for your self,,, see how the people LOVE their dogs like children.

Look in my bed,,, you will see my wife on one side,, me on the other,,,, with very minimal bed,, you will see 8 rat terriers in the middle spread out like yesterday's wash...  happy to share THEIR bed with us. They love us.

Ken

G'day Pamela,

I dream of the ration of good breeders to bad breeders being 50/50.

I fear that it is now about 3/97. I know that sounds scary.... but people need to look at any breed.... look on OFFA.org, look in newspapers.

Ohio recently had a bust on a "breeder" reporting over 1,000 dogs. That to me is incredible. She escaped ALL charges by surrendering her dogs. That to me is wrong. She is forbidden from breeding. Who will police that??

Use just this board,,, how many puppy people have purchased puppies with BOTH parents listed on CHIC... these tests are the MINIMUM recommended by the parent club for Rat Terriers. The MINIMUM.

Many tell me that testing is overkill..... "our breed does not have those issues"...

YES IT DOES..... I have seen patella (knee) problems, hip problems, elbow problems, eye problems, ear problems,,,,  should I go on.

As you suggest... in 100 years we will see if most breeders refusing to test is working. But I am not sure our breed will survive to see those results at their current rate.

I am not sure that UKC or AKC can force people to test. AKC and UKC are a registry, they are not an animal welfare organisation.

Breeders truly must police themselves.

Take the ratties that people are calling toys or tiny toys,,, 3 and 4 pounds.... 8 inches at the withers. These dogs are disqualified in AKC... any (rat terrier) dog under 10 inches at the withers is not allowed by AKC... but this can only be policed if that dog goes into the show ring.... and it NEVER will,,, EVER.

These people register their dogs AKC for the very reason you mentioned.... some buyers then see them as "real dogs" ,, so these "breeders" can sell more of them more easy. And THAT is their ONLY Incentive.... CASH MONEY.

They do not show their dogs, they do not test them nor do they do anything else with them. They do not need to or want to. They are making puppies to sell. Their abrupt reply to me is (after they tell me to F off)... "we breed for the pet market only"... "there is a shortage of pets"....

Shelters world wide are FULL of pets... they kill 1,000's of them daily. And we best not start on designer dogs that are nothing more than cross bred MUTTS.

Thank you Pamela for taking my post in the manner it was intended. I get very passionate and I can be just the tiniest bit blunt. But my love is this wonderful little breed... The Rat Terrier. 

I guess my point is... AKC, UKC, UKCI or TV shows cannot change how breeders breed..... Breeders can.

The REAL people you and I should be educating is Puppy Buyers. If every buyer insisted on good parents,,, some testing results posted on OFFA for the world to see, breeders willing to answer the hard questions... well some "other" breeders would quit.

Imagine that person in Wal-Mart car park,,,, selling dogs for $75.00.... go ask them,,, are the parents tested,,, are they shown,,, what gurantee can you give me?????? have they had 3 shots? What about Rabies?...  A Microchip??? ... All these types of questions.

Very quickly,, selling poor quality Ratties would not be easy and it would not be all profit.... so that incentive I mentioned above would be gone?

If buyers refuse to "enable" bad breeders..... they would disappear.

It is really that simple.

Ken

Changing the breed standard is not something that is taken lightly at all. It's a long process and may or may not be approved by the registry.

It is FSS, but does have a standard set by the AKC parent club. They do have fun matches right now. They have set a 10" height min for the the breed.

The AKC fun matches - yes

They are usally held during an AKC event.

There are plenty of events around the country for fun. Here in NorCal there are Terrier Fun Days. Races and other fun stuff.

G'day Pam,

Where do I start?

Rat Terriers.... KNOWN ISSUES .. Mange, poor immnune systems, luxating patellas (knees), Canine Hip Dysplacia (CHD), Legg-Calve Perthes (LCP), eye lens issues, elbows..... these are dogs I have seen announced or seen with my own eyes.

You maybe should not start me on tiny tot crap people promote that VERY obviously coem from crosses with chihuahuas and/or toy fox terriers. These dogs are more than prone to knee issues. A BIG reason why these people do not test.

These small dogs are also prone to water on the brain... "hydrocephalous".... this is a disease that tiny dogs get... and REAL Rat Terriers should NOT get this. But if people insist on breeding tiny 2 pound dogs that come from an influence of chi/tft this type of issue IS a real risk.

Many people will tell you that the Rat Terriers are a very healthy breed.. They are,,, BUT these issues above ARE there... and must be loked for to be prevented. This is why the more decent breeders test their stock.... look on www.offa,org to see Rat Terriers that are tested... you will see these issues DO exist.... but breeders are working to remove effected dogs.

But people must realise,,, Breeders that test are in the minority.

Some people will even tell you that testing is fanatical, over kill or just not needed. But you must make that decision.

Ken Jones

www.kndkennels.com

I'd only like to add that testing is no guarantee but we feel that it lessens the odds. 

We have dogs here that have tested positive for some of the isses Ken mentioned above and they were removed from breeding..now tell me how many puppies would we could we have produced from those dogs if we had not tested and bred with them?? How many breeders are doing that very thing because they do NOT test and remove dogs with those issues  ??

WOW!!! I am REALLY LATE reading this, but i feel the need to reply to it.  As I was reading this forum with everyone's opinions.  I started to feel more and more ignorant.  For some reason,  I never even thought about the reasons why most "purebred" dogs have their own little history of medical/mental problems and its all because of the registries, i do see that point.  the more popular a breed gets the more in demand they get.   WOW,  I am sorry, I am a bit dumbfounded.  I can not even BELIEVE, now, that I got so offended that a girl I know called my Trixy a Mutt! To me that is such a harsh word, but only because she has two purebred dogs one of which is a Min Pin that actually looks like an anorexic chi.  I appriciate that the rat terrier is considered now, a "rare breed"  because,  as I have read and from what i am understanding from most everyone else,  these dogs are way to special to be put out there like that.  If they were advertised more,  they would loose more of their traits somewhere along the line.   And i do appricate that not ONE of them looks/acts exactly alike.  That is awesome,  they are all individuals on the outside and inside.  That is what makes them so special. I have not been around a whole lot of rat terriers,  but just knowing  and watching my trix,  she has more personality, and has the best temperment,  than i have ever seen in a dog.  She IS my baby,  I wouldn't know what I would do if something ever happened to her.  She is the best dog i have ever had....even though she feels the need to test me every now and then, lol.  Sorry guys,  i didn't mean to ramble on.  It is just that everyone is so concerned about whether or not their dog is registered with this club or that club,  and their dog is better because it is "purebred"  and they spend more money on their dog, blah blah blah,  and when it comes right down to it, those registries actually, ripped them off in the long run because their dog is more likely to have health problems.  I say save the Ratties, keep them out of the registries.