Breed Standards

Jim Taylor · Post by **Jim Taylor** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:11 pm

I saw an edifying but deeply disturbing programme on BBC2 last night where the chief vet on the RSPCA described some of the dogs at crufts as mutants because of the strict adherance to cosmetic breed standards. It has resulted in the most grotesque deformities of some breeds of dogs, causing pain and disease. Can anyone else see a (albeit less severe) parallel with Dexter breed standards.

Rutherford · Post by **Rutherford** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 3:05 pm

Unfortunately yes. At present we are not in a position to remedy it, but the Dexter breed
has already been associated with the Belgium Blue and questions asked in EU discussions.
A few European counties already refuse to accept the ‘short leg’ Dexter and in time I think
it likely we shall have to think hard on this one. Meanwhile I suggest those who are already
converted carry on breeding mutant free Dexters persuading others by example.
Beryl (Woodmagic)

Martin · Post by **Martin** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:51 pm

I saw the same programme Jim, it was horific and I for one will never be tempted to buy a pedigree dog again.

springwater · Post by **springwater** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:16 pm

I'm surprised that you have made this decision based on an obviously biased programme.

I watched the programme and was very upset by some scenes and agree that some breeds have been allowed to become far too exagerated, and there are some breeders and judges whose judgement is flawed. However, there are breeds that are not exagerated.

I was very annoyed that no mention was made of the breeders and breed clubs who do their best to breed happy, healthy dogs. You won't be surprised that I am involved with pedigree dogs! I belong to 3 breed clubs (for the same breed), which all have codes of ethics that I abide by. They require us as breeders to health test our dogs before they are bred from. I have bred and shown my dogs since the mid 1980s. I keep in contact with the people who have my puppies and want to know how they are throughout their lives.

Please don't let this sensationalist programme turn you against the pedigree dog - just learn from it and find out about the breed/s you are interested in and any conditions which may affect them, then ensure you buy from a responsible breeder who health tests their breeding animals.

helen salmon · Post by **helen salmon** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:23 pm

I'm afraid I have to comment on this one. I didn't see the programme in question, and I know that some breeds have been spoilt dreadfully. However I have been involved in the dog world for 30-odd years and I can say with hand on heart that health is a huge part in deciding to breed a litter in my breed (Large Munsterlanders). OK we are not one of the really numerous breeds, so there are virtually no pet owners breeding with little knowledge, but the overall health and fitness of our breed has increased in the years it has been in this country. As well as producing sounder animals with good temperament, we have also managed to maintain the working ability too.
I am sure that the careful breeders of Dexters would have a similar reaction if someone said they would never buy a pedigree cow again because they saw a sensational programme about bulldog calves.

Bury Hill Farm · Post by **Bury Hill Farm** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:38 pm

I must agree with Helen on this one imagine the public reaction if there were a TV programme showing Bulldog calves and depicting in a biased fashion !

Surely judgement should be reserved until both sides of a story have been heard ?

Barry

Sylvia · Post by **Sylvia** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:17 am

Poor Dexters, what a sorry state they are in when a long-term and respected breeder refers to what must be at least 50% or probably more of them as mutants.

Anna · Post by **Anna** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:23 am

Barry really has a point there. A biased TV programme showing bulldog calfs talking about the Dexter as an unhealthy breed could result in a lot of badwill too and would make some people avoid dexter beef if they can choose.

By the way, I live in one of these countrys where shorts are banned and I am very happy with that. I am not after a minature cow or something basset looking, I just want a SMALL cow. My nonshort Dexters are small enough for me. To watch your debate from the outside often reminds me of the neverending debate about wolfs going on in my country – it does not always make sense to me. It is truely my wish NOT to offend anyone by saying this! I understand very well your different views and problems. I just hope that these problems will be solved for the benefit of the Dexters.

Edited By Anna on 1219307120

Saffy · Post by **Saffy** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:27 am

Jim mentions a less severe parallel in Dexters. I take it he is talking about Bulldog calves?

Surely they are a totally different thing as they haven't been gradually bred and selected for that shape of head etc over a number of generations like the dogs would have been.

Also surely it is a more severe condition, that is why they are born dead and it is a blessing that they are born dead as if they weren't always born dead it would be shockingly obvious to the owner that it is a more severe condition, the calf could never stand, suck or breathe, just wriggle around a bit and die!

Stephanie

Post by **Mark Bowles** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:42 pm

Sorry Beryl, i have to take issue with your description of short leg Dexters as "Mutants".
I take offence at that description and i suggest you owe an aplogy to all those dexter owners out there that keep "mutant" Dexters.

Duncan MacIntyre · Post by **Duncan MacIntyre** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:51 pm

Any mutant is simply an organism which carries a genetic mutation. A mutation just means that there has been a change in the replication of the genetic material as that individual or its predecessors was being made. Without mutations no evolution would have taken place and we would all still be mindless gel at the bottom of the ocean. A mutation can be good or bad - it may give the mutant an advantage or a disadvantage. Whilst there is little doubt that short legged Dexters are the result of some ancestor having had a mutation, we need not necessarily look on the term as derogatory. the short legs is what has kept the Dexter breed going through many lean years when only serious enthusiasts bred them.

We are now in a different time and have vastly different knowledge of what causes the short legged Dexter. I happen to believe that given time and enough selection a similar small cow can be produced without the short legged gene, about the same size and almost the same conformation, though some of the beefiness is due to the illusion created by hanging the same volume of muscle on a shorter skeleton.

However, I do not think we should witch-hunt the short leg untill we have shown more conclusively that we can breed acceptable non-carriers for the true Dexter enthusiast. We need time, lots of it, and tolerance, even more of it.

Duncan

Rutherford · Post by **Rutherford** » Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:44 am

Sorry Mark I had no intention of offending, indeed I was pleading for tolerance. I agree
With Duncan we need time, although I would point out that overseas have done more to
prove that one can indeed breed for a small animal without using the bulldog gene. In the
past the prejudice has all been on the side of the short leg in this country. My own attitude
from the outset has been one of persuasion not compulsion, and today as more newcomers
come in I think this is beginning to pay off, but I feel folks should choose and there should
be no compulsion.
Beryl (Woodmagic)

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Fri Aug 22, 2008 8:33 am

I would point out that overseas have done more to
prove that one can indeed breed for a small animal without using the bulldog gene.

I don't understand the logic of trying to breed for smallness by using a gene that hides what is genetically really there. Or am I missing the point? If you have two animals, one is a carrier and is physically very small, and the one next to her is a non-carrier and is small but just a bit bigger, if you then put them both to the same bull (say non-carrier for simplicity), you could well get bigger animals from the short leg than the non-carrier. But if you consistently aim for identifiable, real smallness then you will get consistent results, surely?

Sylvia · Post by **Sylvia** » Fri Aug 22, 2008 10:54 am

As I no longer breed Dexters I can play devils advocate here.

Keeping an animal at its natural size is a laudable aim and putting up with uneconomic returns for the pleasure of getting a superb product and knowing you are preserving a breed as it should be is fine.

Breeding down for smallness is only a few steps away from the American chap breeding absolute tiddlers as pets and lawnmowers. And it flies in the face of every other cattle breeder who is trying to get a more economical, commercial beast.

So is the Dexter untouched by the bulldog gene the non-short of today ? If it is, it is those which should be the blue print for future breeding. Breeding non shorts down to resemble a type flawed by a fatal gene is a peculiar way of going about things to say the least.

But then the 'flawed' short Dexter has managed to establish itself as the true and much prized Dexter. It is possible to breed these safely by following a few simple rules. What is wrong with continuing to breed them ?

How interesting it will be to see what happens to Dexters in the future.

Pennielea · Post by **Pennielea** » Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:10 pm

I too would like to stir the pot. The true non-short Dexter is the Kerry! As the short legs were imported to Britain 100 years ago only half the genes of the Kerry Dexter breed were used. When the Dexter herd book was founded in 1919? it used only the short leg genes. Prior to this both were registered in the same herd book, the non shorts were registered as Kerry and short legs as Dexter.

Ian