ClantyreSheltie
Forums Sage
Yes. I did, and I'm sad it didn't end up with puppies.
Merle to Merle Breeding is Ok as Long as You're Ok With the Outcome??
- Thread starter Mikos_Mom
- Start date
Yes. I did, and I'm sad it didn't end up with puppies.
The question is really about ethics in general.
You either strive to produce puppies that are healthy and strong representatives of the breed OR you've somehow justified in your own mind why it's ok not to.
You're either ethical or you aren't.
How can one conduct a breeding that has a 1 in 4 chance of producing blind & deaf dogs and then turn around and speak out against back yard breeders, breeders who don't do health testing, etc? IMHO… breeding merle to merle makes you just as unethical as byb's and greeder over-breeders, etc. You're just unethical with more cache because your dogs have papers.
You either strive to produce puppies that are healthy and strong representatives of the breed OR you've somehow justified in your own mind why it's ok not to.
You're either ethical or you aren't.
How can one conduct a breeding that has a 1 in 4 chance of producing blind & deaf dogs and then turn around and speak out against back yard breeders, breeders who don't do health testing, etc? IMHO… breeding merle to merle makes you just as unethical as byb's and greeder over-breeders, etc. You're just unethical with more cache because your dogs have papers.
As long as they are willing to take responsibility for any pups with disabilities in the resulting litter, I don't have a problem with experienced breeders who choose to do a merle to merle breeding for the purpose of improving the virtues of their line(s). And, I think that it is far different than a backyard breeder who is trying to produce the elusive, white Sheltie, is not showing to present their breeding stock to the fancy, and doesn't plan to ensure that any disabled pups receive loving care for their entire life.
I certainly respect those who hold a different opinion, but I also know long-time, respected breeders who have done merle to merle breedings, and I would never presume to condemn their decision.
I certainly respect those who hold a different opinion, but I also know long-time, respected breeders who have done merle to merle breedings, and I would never presume to condemn their decision.
I'm just curious what you mean by "take responsibility for any pups with disabilities"? Is euthanizing them "taking responsibility"?
I just don't understand why someone would take the chance of producing puppies that just end up being euthanized right away.
SheepOfBlue
Premium Member
Easy solution. Society is willing to care for you if you are disabled but we will give you better odds out of compassion. So every time you breed Merle to Merle if there is a 25% chance of a puppy being borne with a defect we will give you 0.25% odds for each pup in the litter. Random draw on if you get a defect, then another to see if you are blind or deaf or both. Still want to breed the pair Mr/Ms Breeder? If so I will plug in the soldering iron just in case your 'luck' is bad.
Justicemom
Forums Celebrity
There is not black dog or bitch that could be use to improve the virtures of the line? The answer is likely yes.
In this day and age when dog breeders and dog fanciers are under fire. Where the good and the bad get lumped into the same evil group. It doesn't seem to be responsible behavior. How do we defend ourselves if we do the same things we condeem BYB and puppy millers for? JQP doesn't get see the difference.
Also, where does it stop? Is it ok to breed a dog with HD, epilepsy, VWD, the list goes on as long as you are willing to "be responsible" for defective puppies and we know what we are doing. These things can occur even when we are trying to prevent them. Why stack the deck against ourselves.
I'm just curious what you mean by "take responsibility for any pups with disabilities"? Is euthanizing them "taking responsibility"?
I just don't understand why someone would take the chance of producing puppies that just end up being euthanized right away.
It certainly depends on the degree of disability and the expected quality of life. Euthanasia may be the best choice. Just as it may be for any pup born with a serious congenital defect in any litter. Only the breeder involved can answer that question for themselves.
Conversely, I could ask you this: Since you believe merle to merle should never be done because of the increased risk of blindness and deafness, do you also believe that certain people should not be allowed to reproduce because their genetic makeup has a higher than average risk of producing a baby with congenital defects?
I just don't see this as an entirely black and white issue.
OK while there is no comparison between humans and animals, I do however believe that if you know you are at a higher risk for producing a child with congenital defects, you should not. Why would you want to bring a child into this world and know that their entire life will be a struggle. It is selfish. plain and simple. Now if a child is born and its an anomaly than that is a different story.
Now back to merle to merle breedings. I do not think they should be done, yes I understand breeders do it to produce a clearer color. Is that really a valid reason? No. Same thing as stating they are doing it because that said Merle dog has a virtue they need to incorporate into their program...unacceptable as Dr Shelli said there are hundreds of shelties out there, and even some in Frozen semen that posses that virtue you are seeking whether it be a tri/bi/or sable, just look harder and research more you will find it.
Personally I believe it is playing Russian roulette doing merle to merle breeding, and it does put you into the lump of a BYB. We as responsible breeders are supposed to be ethical, breeding with the knowledge of producing animals that have birth defects is not at all ethical! You are no better than a BYB. Just because they are willing to euthanize defective puppies does not make you better...I do not understand how you can produce and bring into this world knowing you were careless and have to euthanize that innocent puppy is just inconceivable to me...
I dont know how you can live with that on your conscience...I completely agree with everything you said Lightplum.
I don't know how someone could sleep at night after having to euthanize poor innocent puppies they purposely mis-bred.
As the owner of a double merle who ended up in rescue because he was not "perfect" I find the breeding of merle to merle reprehensible.
And I will add that a very unfeeling woman told me that Cooper should have been put down at birth. IT WAS NOT HIS FAULT he was born with defects, it was the responsibility of the irreputable breeder. And although he doesn't realize he has any disabilities, the fact is he doesn't see or hear as he should and that's not fair. It is the direct result of a greedy breeder. Not all such dogs are as lucky to find a loving home as Cooper and Mia have been.
I don't know how someone could sleep at night after having to euthanize poor innocent puppies they purposely mis-bred.
As the owner of a double merle who ended up in rescue because he was not "perfect" I find the breeding of merle to merle reprehensible.
And I will add that a very unfeeling woman told me that Cooper should have been put down at birth. IT WAS NOT HIS FAULT he was born with defects, it was the responsibility of the irreputable breeder. And although he doesn't realize he has any disabilities, the fact is he doesn't see or hear as he should and that's not fair. It is the direct result of a greedy breeder. Not all such dogs are as lucky to find a loving home as Cooper and Mia have been.