What are your feelings on "outside blood" in a purebred genepool?

Question

A few centuries ago, purebreds didn't exist as we know them today but were more or less a type, depending on how isolated they were and how much the owners attempted to isolate them.

Today it's nearly impossible to get outside blood into a purebred genepool, even if it's for very good reasons and very carefully regulated.

One of the best examples of what I'm referring to is the Backcross Project. This incorporated Pointer blood into Dalmatians to eliminate some health problems in the Dalmatians. The Dalmatians were bred enough that the Pointer blood was very minimal. By the time this project concluded, AKC had decided not to register the offspring.

Do you think it's healthy for purebreds to get well-researched, documented, "fresh blood" every once in a while or does it ruin purebred dogs?

http://dalmatianheritage.com/about/nash_research.htm

Answer 1

It was done in 1948's .. an "accidental breeding) adding a Newf into the Bernese. It was needed as the genepool was so very narrow...and eventually the pups were allowed.

Unfortunately, some very Newf like heads and the fuller longer coat of the Newf are now quite common... and a more "traditional" style of Bernese has a harder time in the show ring.... of course part of that is the American "Bigger is better" mentality.

Answer 2

I don't know about outcrossing a different breed altogether, but I do agree with what the basenji people did. The gene pool was getting very limited, and (with AKC's blessings) they sent representatives from the breed club over to africa to hand select some dogs to bring back over to add to the registry to widen the gene pool. Perhaps some open mindedness from AKC regarding dogs that are still obviously purebred, just possibly from a different region or registry be allowed. And perhaps go to something like the european horse breeders do. If these "outside" dogs were allowed, their offspring would have to be inspected before being granted registration, perhaps even just limited to competition, until such time that they achieved a title. Then they could be evaluated for breeding status. Oh well...silly musings...it'd never happen. AKC is in the business of selling registration numbers....they're not interested in the quality of the dogs being produced.

Answer 3

I guess if you're dealing with very severe health problems that you cannot eliminate from the gene pool through heavy policing, this would be fine. I personally have to wonder how badly you have to screw up a breed in order for this to be the only way to fix it.

Otherwise, if you're breeding for a function and want to bring in outside breeds to improve this function, I don't see the point of continuing to call or register your mixed dogs that original breed -- clearly, if you have something that is a mixture of Greyhound, Pointer, and Siberian Husky to get speed, it is no longer a Siberian.

I also don't agree with bringing in outside blood for the sake of "convenience" -- i.e. the attempt to get tailless Boxers using Corgis. What is so difficult about docking that you need to spend 20 generations trying to fix all of the type problems that crossing Boxers and Corgis would produce.

If docking is illegal, and they're trying to get around it, they should have considered that when the legislation was in its infancy.

Answer 4

I don't know about that, it's good I guess that breeders who know what they are doing can do that. The post about the >>There was also a study in England with Boxers that had a Corgi mixed in to give them a naturally docked tail. It was very interesting too.<< I don't know how that would happen as Corgis don't have naturally docked tails. EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, you'll come across a litter that may have a pup or two with a naturally docked tail, but to cross breed Corgis into that breed in order to create a dog with a naturally docked tail just wouldn't work. I haven't had a litter of pups yet, that I haven't had to dock their tails, as the breed standard calls for. That wasn't aimed at the poster of the question, but more at the study, I think it's useless, to do that type of breeding for that reason, because it doesn't always work.

Answer 5

The gene pool on AKC BCs is not very large, compared to the ABCA. AKC registration is very low, which is why they are keeping the stud books open still to this day. They want more people with ABCA registered dogs to come into the AKC registered gene pool. It's likely the stud books will remain open for a very long time on BCs. Most ABCA people don't like the idea of judging a BC in the ring, as most of these big name AKC conformation breeders are not proving these dogs to be good working dogs. They want the barbie BC and don't care if they can herd.

Answer 6

Only two good reasons to do this:
1. You don't want to show the dog, but you need it for a certain kind of work. ex: Greyhounds are popular to mix with Dogo's for hunting. They make a fast, heavy bodied dog with an intense prey drive.
2. You have dedicated your life to developing a new breed of dog with it's own standard and purpose.
That said, I thin the Kennel clubs may need to think about mixing the gene pool for the overall health and temperament of the dogs one day. This will need to be done on an organized and responsible basis, not in the back yards of uneducated, inexperienced breeders.

Answer 7

If it makes the dog healthier and adds to their lifespan, then I am all for it PROVIDED it does not effect the breed standard in the long term. Imagine owning GSD's and other big dogs without the worry of bloat, or even hip dysplasia. After all, all purebred dogs came from selectively breeding various breeds of dogs for certain traits that people found so endearing. 200 years ago there was no such thing as the GSD.

Answer 8

Sorry but your statement is an oxymoron since as soon as you introduce "outside blood" into a purebred genepool you no longer have a purebred genepool. The introduction of outside blood introduces undesirable characteristics that far outweigh any benefit. To try such a project that might eventually have any benefit would take numerous (10-20)generations of extremely careful breeding by very educated and informed people.

Sorry but from a practical point of view there is no such thing as "hybrid vigor" since the odds of genetic problems cropping up is much higher in a population that is allowed to breed at random than one that is control and only the ones that don't exhibit the "problem" are used to produce the next generation. If there is a problem in a given breed the only way to fix it without adding new problems is by testing and selectively breeding only members of the breed that don't have the problem.

Answer 9

My personal feelings are: The breeds are now developed. In each breed there is the written description of the 'Ideal' to strive for by breeding the best specimens to more of the best. To introduce bloodlines of another breed or mix into the line is to take a giant leap backwards (as in Labradoodles, Puggles, Chiweinies) and with one breeding you have produced mixed breed dogs. You have lost a good portion of the selective breeding and the processes that have been done towards that ideal specimen.

I wouldn't want to waste my time, my energy, or my bloodlines.

If understanding your question correctly, you are speaking of bringing in a different breed or mix to the bloodline, not of bringing in a stud or female from another kennel with different bloodlines. Correct???

Answer 10

I think that outcrossing, done by experienced breeders with an end goal in mind is a fine thing, and think that in cases like the one above, it's a shame the AKC did not support the breeder's efforts.

In cases like that with closed registries, the breeders have a harder task of finding the best and soundest animals within a limited gene pool and working to better them.

I'm glad that with the American Rabbit Breeders Association, we can crossbreed as needed to help bring in desirable traits or help improve rare breeds.