Breeders, would you consider the following to be 'betterment of the breed'?

Question

In France, professional breeders have changed the pug in a way which they feel is an improvement. Because pugs are known to have respiratory problems, the face has been changed (the pug nose has been altared). Secondly, a lot of French people live in apartments and prefer very little dogs. (The yorkie is extremely popular there). Most pugs in France now look about the size of a 3-4 month old pug puppy of normal size. They can be easily carried in your hands. Their eyes are much buggier, they are thinner than usual and their face looks weird, frankly.
This has been done to improve the "health" and to have a "more desirable size" pug. It makes me more than a little upset. The pug has been around for a minimum of 4000 years with little change in the original appearance of this breed, and has survived quite well "as is". Do you feel that this type of breeding (by the professionals) is ok? This was not done with random breeding, but by deliberate breeding.

Please leave off negative comments about France. It is irrelevant to the question. This is a question about dog breeding practices and has nothing to do with France as a country.

Answer 1

Not really an improvement, from my standards. Brachycephalic dogs have their problems, yes, but what other health issues have they created in this new breed? I would fear the smaller dog would have more problems birthing and having issues of the spine. As it is both of these dogs are prone to broken bones and pregnancy issues.
I don't think "desirable size" is a qualification for wanting to make a new breed such as this! If they are wanting an animal, try a rat or gerbil. These animals are pocket sized, trainable and quite cute in doll clothes. We have done enough to hinder the dog in his natural state, let's leave a "classic" alone! These dogs are beautiful in their own right-and are in no need of changes.
But as you stated, this is an opinion question; so in regards-this is my opinion. Thanks for asking and bringing this to our attention.

Answer 2

Professional breeders must be responding to public demand. I have not seen photos, but if their breathing is easier, it would be a health improvement as well. People's needs in the city are different than the needs of people in the country. If breeding this "new" pug increases the popularity of the breed then it may either be a breed improvement or spur others to accomplish a breed improvement. In any event, hopefully those who disagree with this variety of Pug will have a bigger audience interested in and looking for Pugs of the "older" type as the genuine Pug.

I personally am unhappy with the "new" Min Pin. Min Pin's have become black and tan chihuahuas for the most part. I believe they are intended to be a sturdier dog than what we see today - a mini guard/ watchdog/playmate reminiscent of a doberman pinscher. Many people like this "new" variety. Those breeding the smaller version would say it was an improvement. Some of it is personal preference. We like what we are used to and what we believe is right.

Answer 3

No, I do not think that it is bettering the breed. I do not necessarily believe that you ever are "bettering" the breed, because I do not think that dogs now are always better than dogs before. But first of all, they are not doing a breed a favor when you intentionally breed them smaller and the smaller ones often have extra health problems. I do not think that the nose is bettering the breed just because it doesn't adhere to breed standards, and if you properly breed a pug (or any other brachycephalic breed) they should not have that much more trouble breathing than a "normal" dog (except for heat and high activity, but the dogs with the longer nose may still be intolerant to strenuous exercise and high temperatures). But, I would think that breeding the dog's nose longer would be more of a "betterment" than the size, even though it does not adhere to breed standards.

I do not think that type of breeding is okay, even though it is done by professionals. In my opinion, they are doing more damage to the breed than good and they are no better than the people that breed mutts just to make a buck. It is not in the best interest of the dogs.

Answer 4

The breed standard does not (or at least, should not) change. It describes a dog which is ideally suited to it's original purpose.

Occasionally some breeders succumb to the temptation to breed for fads. In my breed, you will see trends towards extremely long ears, ultra-heavy bone, excessive wrinkling etc. None of these things are considered CORRECT by serious breeders who understand that the basset is a hunting dog. In fact, you are more likely to see these exagerations from breeders who are trying to satisfy the pet market, rather than those who are trying to "improve the breed". Sometimes the pendulum swings the other way and you get ultra-refined, elegant hounds that move as fast as the afghan. This is not correct either. A dedicated, knowlegeable breeder ignores the fads and strives to produce what is CORRECT and to standard.

I'd say that in the case of these french pugs, the "breeders" in question are not those who are dedicated to the breed, it's soundness and it's health, but those who are following the fads and trying to appeal to the pet market.

Answer 5

I haven't seen photos of the "altered" dogs you mention, they sound rather awful, but then pugs have never been a favourite of mine.
It can't be any worse than the terrible mutilation that is done to such dogs as dobermans, mastiffs etc, eg. cutting half the ear off, chopping off tails etc. done in the U.S. and probably elsewhere in the name of "improvement".
Nobody can improve on what nature intended in the first place......in fact the only time I think I have seen breeding done to improve a breed, is the reversal of bad breeding practices done to the british bulldog.
The australian bulldog, has had a large proportion of the many years of cruel and exagerated (sp?) inbreeding reversed, to remove the cronic health problems that have plagued that breed for many years.
They still retain the beautiful bulldoggy look which I love so much, but they no longer have such severe skin issues and breathing difficulties they have been prone to, and their legs are longer and can support their bodies without the back strain they previously suffered.
I am not a breeder. but love these dogs, and the absolutely deformed animals that were being shown as champions was very sad.
You seem to love pugs as much as I love the bulldog, so I can understand your frustration and anger.

Answer 6

It sounds like they took 1 step forward and 2 steps back. A step forward with modifying the nose to help them breath, but then 2 steps back with making them smaller and making their eyes buggier. These dogs are probably more prone to health problems than traditional pugs. If they wanted a a small dog with a longer nose, short hair and bulging eyes, they should have just gone with chihuahuas. Theres no use in "modifying" this ancient breed.


also, I have never heard of this before. If yu have pics or a link I would like to see it, thanx.

Answer 7

Breeding a dog to have buggy eyes, a short nose, a blocky build, and extremely small size isn't breeding for health. Dogs with buggy eyes are more prone to eye problems, and short noses have a host of problems associated with it, like respiratory problems, poor stamina, and a higher tendency towards lung cancer and other lung diseases. Blocky builds tend to make a dog slow and unagile (and really blocky dogs like bulldogs can't even swim!). Extremely small size, like 5 pounds or less, is also mean to breed into a dog because they're extremely fragile. They can break their bones by jumping off the back of a couch, a big dog can kill them with a single shake, and their organs will sometimes fail suddenly.

But purebreds aren't bred for health. Even though extremely short nosed dogs have a terrible time getting enough oxygen, people still breed pugs and bulldogs. And even though floppy ears are prone to infection, people still breed bloodhounds and golden retrievers to have floppy ears. And even though giant sized breeds have ridiculously short lifespans and are riddled with bone and joint problems, people still breed Great Danes and mastiffs to be as big as possible.

That's why I think a good, naturally built mutt is the best pet to have in terms of health. Breeding for medium size, medium build, a long muzzle, perked ears, and plenty of energy is what makes a healthy dog (of course, any dog can get diseases). I think purebred breeders do not think of their dogs when they breed. They only breed because they want certain characteristics that make the dog have an uncomfortable life.

Answer 8

I don't think breeding ANY dog to only be 3 or 4 lbs is "better for its health"... more like better suited for sale to people who don't really understand pet health, just want something small and cute..the Paris Hilton syndrome. Dogs are living beings, not fashion accessories. But unfortunately, as long as there's a market, the practice will continue... just like the "designer dog" mixed breed mutts for $600 BS that we are being plagued with now.

Answer 9

We have deliberately bred many animals to suit our own needs.
After all, pugs used to be wolves.
Sheep, pigs, goats, horses, cows, and many other animals have been changed by humans.
This is no different.
The only thing I disagree with is breeding more animals when we are slaughtering pets by the hundreds for no other reason than there are not enough homes.

Cheers.

Answer 10

That breed is a hideous little breed anyway. If they are able to make them more comfortable Respiratory-wise, isnt that all that matters?