As for breeding .... I bred for health and temperament. This litter was not bred for conformation but for pet companions. I bought the mother because she was unique and feel in love with her temperament/looks/personalty ... the whole package. She is papered, but obviously she isn't purebred and doesn't fit the standard. I went back as far as the great grandparent on the dam's side ... and believe the linage was lied about. (we weren't originally going to have a litter with her). Never the less, the mother is a wonderful companion and is an incredible dog ... we had a few interested family homes, so we decided to get her health testing done. Puppies are place in pet homes (by mostly family and friends). DO I plan to continue breeding this solid black into my program? Answer is no. The mother is NOT part of our breeding goals/program. All my other dogs are purebred and follow the standard. For our goals and program: We have selected to breed purebred Shiba's with healthy lines and good temperaments to better the breed. If any fail testing or do not suit what we are looking for, we will not use them.
I understand that many people disprove of me choosing to have this litter, but I do not want to hide or be ashamed of this litter or their mother. I am proud of ALL my dogs (whether they fit the standard or not) and would like to share them with whom ever is interested. This is why I posted my video. )
Well said Jenn! I think in Shibas the temperament is the main issue. Am I right that they have problems with that? So if you have dogs that fit the standard more than perfect for their other trait (if colour is the only problem) I would make that pairing. By too selective breeding breeders soon have issues with in-breeding.
Thank you for answering. I have a few more questions.
This was her second litter correct? What about your pinto and creams that have been bred. Do you believe they muster up to the breed standards in your country? To the Japanese standard? Do you think breeding non standard dogs improves the breed?
Your dogs are obviously well cared for and loved pets, that is not the issue. The issue I see is that breeding out of standard and known mixed breeds into your program will be detrimental to you as a reputable breeder when word gets around (and it has). That will make it very hard for you to find a quality dog so that you can achieve your breeding goals. I'm guessing that you don't want to be classified by the dog community as a backyard breeder, especially if you plan to get into Shikoku or Kai.
There are so many non related Shibas who are decent breed examples, that if the effort is put into it, being "too selective" won't be a problem. Intentionally breeding multiple dogs that are very out of standard, is just plain lazy, regardless if the temperment is nice. Plenty of decent dogs from decent breeders who have decent temperaments and great health already, you can't use that as an excuse to flaunt established standards.
I don't want to come off as attacking or anything, but you do have one more other dog that does not follow the standard but you are still planning on breeding according to your blog. Tina is a pinto (white tail tip, too much white marking) and therefore also non-standard.
You do have two dogs with famous Shiba kennels like Copperdot and Jogoso in their pedigrees. And I think I remember a Morningstar in a pedigree as well. Both Copperdot and Morningstar travel to Japan and import dogs from Japan so MirkaK's comment about in-breeding is not so relevant here.
Guess I can't understand why you won't make a clean break from breeding creams in the past and a pinto and seal in the present (Molly is a seal aka "bad black"). Maybe things are different in Canada but in the US that type of breeding practice within Shibas is a sure mark of a less reputable breeder who breeds for novelty rather than preservation.
So it's called "seal"? I didn't know that. Is that very common in Shiba (cream is pretty common)? Come on Ann, hit us with some color genetics... Where does "seal" come from? @ayk
Molly is probably a red (Ay-) with one dominant black gene (Kk). Normally the dominant black completely hides the red/yellow color like in the Belgium Sheepdog, but sometimes it doesn't and allows some color to go through. You'll often see this seal color in American Akitas.
Because Molly carries dominant black, she's able to produce black pups even though the sire may not carry any black genes.
As for where Molly's seal color comes from, it'll have to be from at least one black parent. Chows definately have dominant black. In Kai, it's not proven. In Shibas, definately not.
Ayk - Thanks for the coloring info, love it! I don't feel it as if your attacking or anything ... actually this is good. As a person and how I do things, how I think, etc, I am always growing, learning and changing. I am sure this applies to a lot of people! I love any input or information that I could apply to my dogs, etc (weather I change it ... well, it all depends!).
Yes, I have Tina ... but I wouldn't call her a pinto. She has a white tail tip. I thought pinto had to have half to two thirds white covering their bodies? Both her parents were to standard (one red the other correctly marked blk&tan). Wouldn't the white tip be considered just a fault. Yet there is a good chance her offspring could be perfectly marked. My question would be , with Tina's good temperament and health tests ... even though she has a white tip on her tail ... should she not be bred? If the answer is no, then should a shiba that carries the cream gene not be breed? As there would be a chance a visible cream pup could be born if both parents carry that gene! Just curious about your opinion.
As you would put it .. we are breaking clean from the seal!! We have decide not to breed her again. And for the creams ... I struggle with that one. My first Shiba was the cream. I see nothing wrong with them. They are gorgeous and make wonderful companions. Yet I do understand they are not of standard! We did however retire our cream to break away from that color as I am going in a different direction then when I first started (learn, change, grow). Did you know at first the Cream colored Shiba was in the Canadian Standard. There was actually a cream that got its Championship in the show rings. That was years ago and the standard changed ... but I am sure the standard will continue to change when a new generation decides it should be different (their way). As for my other dogs, yes, they come from very nice backgrounds ... I am very proud of their linage.
Lindsayt - No, I don't see myself as a backyard breeder and do not want to be referred as one. I put the time and money into my Shibas .. getting the testing that needs to be done, etc. I do feel that health and temperament are very important and do not use that as an excuse to have creams, or a Shiba with a white tipped tail. I am not a show breeder at this time (though I would like to get in there for the fun of it not the politics), but if other reputable breeders(show or not) would like to give input, etc on how i can better my stock or program, I will listen. We are all here because we love the breed and to work together to better the breed, right! ) Yes, I do plan to get into the Shikoku. As for any other breeds, only as a pet companion. I think in a perfect world I would like to own one of all my favorite breeds LOL, I think anyone would. But in the real world, I would like to focus on just my favorite two. )
AFAIK, cream was put in Western standards due to people misunderstanding the NIPPO standard. Westerners got thrown by the concept of a landrace/Nihon Ken which included white (Kishu, Akita, Hokkaido). Have you read the more closely translated NIPPO standard?
There has been a cream Champion in the US as well (same dog named Kola) before people realized their error and changed this point in the standard. Now, they still need to work on lining up sizes to match NIPPO's. They need to do so with the clear understanding that the NIPPO heights are measured behind the shoulders and not at the shoulders. Which is another cultural difference to overcome.
I call Tina a pinto because that's the common language in the breed. It could also be called white spotting but it's the same group of genes that control both. Breeding extreme white spotting (ie. Tina) will produce pintos and vice versa. Mary Malone, the person who founded the Kai in the US, also was involved in the beginnings of the Shiba in the US. Her name has since become a near curse word in Shibas because she did deliberately breed/produce pintos in addition to the other colors, and some of her dogs did end up in petstore puppymill hands. She was able to produce the white bodied pintos by deliberately breeding pups with lots of white spots.
Since then, there was a notice that a colony of her Shibas had their AKC registration revoked. The AKC rarely ever revokes registration based on puppymills, but boy, do they act when the paperwork don't match the dogs! A lot of people who owned the descendants, even those not obtained via a petstore, were upset to learn that their registrations were pulled.
As to your question...
"with Tina's good temperament and health tests ... even though she has a white tip on her tail ... should she not be bred? If the answer is no, then should a shiba that carries the cream gene not be breed? As there would be a chance a visible cream pup could be born if both parents carry that gene! Just curious about your opinion."
...that's a false parallel. Tina would be the same as comparing a cream shiba, not a colored dog carrying a cream gene. (ie. Compare mismark with mismark.)
In terms of odds, breeding a cream shiba would guarantee that all the offsprings are carriers of cream. If the other parent dog carries cream, it's a 50% chance that the pups would be cream. Right off the bat, you can have 50% pets. Think of it as 50% restriction of your next generation to keep for breeding if you want to adhere to what reputable Shiba breeders do.
Breeding two colored dogs carrying creams would give the odds of 50% carriers and 25% cream. That's a 25% restriction of your next generation which gives you more flexibility.
Thanks for clarifying that. Very interesting. Well, I definitely don't want to produce 'pinto'. I have no problem retiring Tina from my program. So one of her parents must have carried the spotted gene?!
Yes, that would be the case. I suspect both parents would be carrying it though. Admittedly, the spotting genes can be deceptive because there are several types, they're affected by modifier genes, and their appearance is often disregarded as normal extremity spots which do exist (white toes, white hairs on chest). One has to really know the breed and the breed norms to track it accurately. With the large amount of white on Tina though, I'm very certain that her spots are due to the spotting gene.
@ayk: thanks for your explanation of genetics and coat color. It was very interesting to me, and something I've wondered about. Interesting, too, to learn some of the history.
I've seen the "seal" color in AAs. It's a gorgeous color, though of course in AAs it is allowed, unlike in Shibas. I didn't even know it could show up in Shibas.
As for the breeding issue: well, I really don't understand not breeding to standard. I really don't understand breeding a dog from very good lines to one that is not even purebred. (And I don't understand how she has papers if she's not purebred? Falsified papers? That makes me even more puzzled as to why you would breed her....) I mean, I guess I don't understand why doing that is different from the person I got Bel from, who was breeding Shibas to have a deeper chest, just because she liked the look. Granted, the person I got Bel from didn't do health testing, but....I mean, why spend so much money and effort on a line if you're going to breed mixed breeds into the line. I get that this dog has a great temperament, but that doesn't really justify it in my mind.
I understand that things that are carried in recessive genes are hard to gauge, and must be a huge disappointment to breeders when they show up (I have a dog with micro, after all, which means his parents must carry the gene, and I know that was an awful discovery for his breeder). But once you know, why would you continue to breed those dogs?
This all points out to me, again, how very complex breeding is, and how it really takes a lot of knowledge and careful thought and planning.
Well, I think as ayk's response points out, seal does not show up in Shibas, so it's coming from elsewhere. There was no question about Molly's mixed pedigree, but Jenn, as you say yourself, there was some question about her lineage. I don't understand why you would still breed her if you're not even sure that the information you have on paper is accurate -- how can you follow through and ensure that genetic health is not an issue if you don't have the vertical pedigrees?
To be honest, it's hard for me to take you at face value that health is a breeding goal when I don't see any OFA information on the majority of dogs in your breeding program, some of whom have already had multiple litters. I'm glad to see you have provided direct links to Tina and for Takeo's *sire and dam* (though not Takeo himself). But if you encounter a savvy puppy buyer who knows that they can just as easily search the publicly accessible OFA database for themselves, how do you justify the lack of health testing on Molly? Or Cincin? Or Hiro? Or the fact that Tina has only been tested for patellas and preliminary hips, and not for thyroid, glaucoma, or any of the other health issues that Shibas are *known* to have?
As I write, I'm aware that I sound harsh... That's partly because I see this and the Shiba forum as places where breeders (like yourself, like the forum owners and others who have voiced their opinions in this thread) can openly share information and also where potential puppy buyers like myself can educate and become educated about how to make well-informed, ethical decisions about where to get our pups. That is, every thread is open to discussion. It's easy to share in the puppy cuteness, and to admire the bundles of fluffy joy that you've brought to this world. I agree with everyone that your pups ARE cute and they look like they're being brought up in a loving, safe environment -- as all your dogs are kept in a loving, caring home. I want to be clear that I'm not questioning your integrity as a proud "parent" to all your pets!
But as someone who's also done limited work in rescue, who's scoured Craiglist and Petfinder and shelter ads and knows the reality of Shibas in exploitable situations (most of whom were probably bred for the purpose of "mere" companionship), I am extremely suspicious of ANY attempt to promote "unusual" markings or coats in Shibas, especially when the markings fly in the face of established standards and appear to take precedence over genetic health. The information that ayk has shared with us, for example, is something that I would expect a breeder to *already* have studied before proceeding with matings; it should not have come as new knowledge to you. And what would you say to one of your puppy people if, against all better judgment, decides they HAVE to breed one of their little black Shibas that they purchased from you because she's extremely sweet, has a "rare" color, and they just want one of his/her puppies (never mind the others in the litter who also need good homes)?
I'm not expecting you to answer that question right now, but I hope it's something you will consider if you have not already. That's exactly the type of rationale that has come up again and again in scenarios that have caused our beloved Shiba to fall into compromised situations. And it's something that responsible breeders think about and do everything in their power to prevent from happening, partly by not falling for and modeling the same temptations in the first place.
After curlytail's post, I was curious for myself on what I would find. (Pretending to be that savy puppy buyer.)
I didn't find Takeo on the OFA database. His littermate sister is there though, so I would hope that the OFA would upload his results by now if they exist. He's out of half-siblings with a duplicate paternal grandmother and a maternal great-grandmother. Not my cup of tea to use such an inbred dog (outdated prepotent sire theory) but it's not uncommon in the dog world.
Teddy, Ebony, and Bliss were born on July 2010. They are littermates out of Winnie and an Atsumi import (via Morningstar kennels). They can't have official OFA Hip results until they are 2 years old.
Hiro was born April 2010. He won't have official OFA Hip results until 2012. He's slated to sire a litter in summer 2011 which may fall before official OFA Patellas as well (12 months of age minimum). :-( I don't know whether to blame his co-owner, Koyote Kennels, for this rush breeding or not. If I was a real puppy buyer, I would ask Koyote directly.
Winnie does have OFA hips and knees. The hips were done Jan 2011, so *after* the litter that produced Teddy, Ebony, and Bliss. Not great that it was done after the fact, but at least it's before her next litter in summer 2011.
As for Cincin, nothing comes up during my searches. She's slated for a summer 2011 repeat breeding.
IMO, I do agree with curlytails and do wish to see on all the breeding stock updated CERFs (with dates, renewed every 2 yrs), official OFA Patellas (12 months of age), and official OFA hips (2 yrs of age) or PennHip results. These are specifically pointed out on the National Shiba Club of America website as breed health concerns.
For foundation stock, especially originating from imports that have health gaps, I would also want to see some routine testing for thyroid and glaucoma (CERF can't detect glaucoma). Even though they didn't make the official NSCA list for breed health concerns (missed the statistics?), they greatly affect the quality of life for the dogs and their owners.
There is no doubt at all they are adorable, but with all the shiba rescues and purebred pedigree'd conforming Shibas why breed a dog that you are not sure is pure bred or doesn't fit the standard?
1. you are not protecting the breed or improving the overall temperament or the health of the breed. You are only improving the health and temperament of the puppys you just bred. This will not help the Shiba breed in general which is the goal of any reputable breeder. A reputable Shiba breeder will not be seeking out your puppys to include in their breeding program so this can't possibly help the breed. Reputable breeders work hard to protect their breed and to keep it pure.
2.How will you keep the puppys from being bred when they grow up. If they are used for breeding this will produce more mixed breed or non conforming dogs that may end up in pounds,puppy mills or used for dog bait. How will this help protect the Shiba breed?
There is no shortage of good purebred blood, so why is it neccessary to breed a mix or dog that does not fit the standard? In fact their is no shortage of mixed breed and non comforming Shibas. Check out petfinder or any rescue site or local shelter.
3. By knowingly breeding a dog with a questionable pedigree or that does not fit the standard you are sending out the message to every dog owner, backyard breeder and puppy mill, that it is ok breed their dog and it doesn't matter if it fits the standard or is full blooded or not. It is our job as reputable breeders to educate everyone on the proper ethics of dog breeding and breed protection.
4.This is exactly why lawmakers are repeatedly trying to introduce new bills to ban breeding. They want to target anyone who breed x amount of litters or own x amount of dogs and can't see that reputable breeders are not the problem. The real problems are Backyard Breeders and Puppy Mills.
Do you really think that they will be satisfied and not keep changing these laws until everyone is allowed only 1 or 2 dogs that are spayed and then they can only be of a certain breed since we have all the BSL s.
They have powerful groups like Peta and HSUS pushing them into these laws.These groups have money (which we unwittingly donate) that they give to these politicians under the guise of campain donations. If Peta and other similar groups acheive their goal there will be no more breeding and our canine companions will be extinct.
AKC, UKC, ADOA and other reputable dog groups are fighting hard to prevent these laws that are banning breeding and they need our help as reputable breeders to follow the Code of Ethics they promote in order to do this.
I am not trying to attack anyone here, but we all need to look at the bigger picture when we decide to breed. Are we protecting and helping the breed that we love so much or are we possibly hurting it?
Perhaps we need to look at our dogs not as pets and best friends when breeding but rather as dogs.
I am sure everyone of us can think of at least one reason to breed our best friend, but maybe we should focus also on the reasons not to breed also. If the reasons not to breed out weigh the reason to breed, maybe we should not be breeding them.
No merit whatsoever ever, as there are numerous healthy breed specimens being used by reputable breeders, and I am very proud of the dedication and work shown by them. Sick dogs happen to everyone, but the reputable breeder seeks to exclude that, whereas the sickest Shibas are coming from mills and byb on large scales and they dont care if it continues to pass on. This is not a case of using an Irish setter (or whatever breed it was) to help produce LUA dalmations that won't have to die at three because they can't urinate.
Are the best of the best shiba breeders not seeing allergies, structural or thyroid issues in their lines? That's pretty awesome if its true. How do we get that kind of info, besides being an inquiring potential puppy buyer?
You should find a reputable breeder and ask them directly. The breeder and public health databases should provide information on individual dogs which is traceable over many generations. I'm very confident regarding the lines I'm using and those of other reputable breeders who are also involved with those lines, but I won't speak for anyone elses programs.
I guess what this thread shows though is that there is a disconnect in what *reputable* really means. And how someone (a breed enthusiast, puppy buyer or dog health advocate) can find the information that transparently states "health is more important than this, this, or this - and we can prove it".
Does that make sense? Because its easy for a breeder to say they breed for health, but what does that mean to the specific breed? And how can a puppy buyer learn before their purchase?
Maybe this is for another discussion... but this thread brings up a ton of important points for the breeding side, and the buyer side.
I agree "reputable breeder" is not the clearest term to use and people can pick and chose what they want it to mean, but I can't think of anything better to describe what I mean to convey however, without being too wordy.
There are laundry lists on this forum describing what a reputable breeder should be. Some of the best shiba and dog people I know, don't do things on those lists, including myself.
Some points I believe that are universal and generally agreed on when discussing a "reputable breeder" refers to a breeder who is respected by their peers, who shows or competes in some venue where the dogs are tested, provides a high level of care for their animals, performs the appropriate health tests as determined by their breed, and strives to follow guidelines set by their respective breed clubs or standards. Everything else is a bonus, but anything less is less than desirable.
@lindsayt - "who shows or competes in some venue where the dogs are tested" So, a breeder must compete in events to be considered a "reputable breeder"? What about breeders who test their stock but not in a competitive setting - like a working hunter or LGD?
----
I think the club community and the expectations set by rescue groups and informed consumers create an environment that makes it essentially impossible to effective "rate" a kennel's breeding program.
In business you have things set in place, credentials a business will work to achieve, government programs created to force a standard (in service, health ...), or organization like the Better Business Bureau.... but breeders are not supposed to operate like a business or they are labeled as "mills", which then allows breeder to escape the already effective corporate rating systems.
Then, on the flip side, you have the breed clubs and larger kennel clubs, who are run by an inner-circle of breeders/judges, who base most of their core values and decision on the politics of the breed. Any breeder who falls outside that inner circle, or who is not accepted by one of the members of the inner-circle, is labeled as a BYB. While at the same time I know of breeder who are members of an "inner circle" who do none of the things listed by Lindsay and also mix "out crossed" lines to achieve a "look" (things a "BYB" would do)... yet these breeds are still considered "reputable" due to their connection to the inner-circle.
Then you have the various groups who are focused on documenting the health of a breed. But they are so few and so selectively focused that they really only track one very small aspect of a dog's overall health (hips, knees, eyes...). These organizations, while they do add some value tracking these specific issues, really only end up becoming a marketing platform for breeds and allows them to ignore other (in some cases more serious) health issues.
To me, this is very similar to the show world, where dogs are marketed as "champions", which allows breeders to ignore health testing and hide behind ribbons, or the working word where schutzhund titles allows breeder to market their dogs as "working dogs" and help hide their poor health. Add them together (health tests + titles) and you have a pretty good marketing campaign - and in some cases all it took to get was the purchase of a few dogs who were already titled and tested (not a huge effort on purchasers part but now they are a "reputable breeder").
This becomes particularly sinister, IMHO, in a small private club like the UKC where the overall organization is a for-profit venture and therefore profits from these same marketing machines that mediocre breeders hide behind.
So, my point is, it's a crap-shoot. Are their good breeders out there that truly care about their program and the health of that breed - YES! Are those same breeders meeting all of Lindsay's list, maybe. Could those same breeds be hiding most of the difficult choices that come up in every breeding program on earth and would cause people to question choices - FOR SURE THEY ARE!
When it comes to picking a breeder I think a potential owner should pick a breeder based on how comfortable they are with that person and their (breeding) goals.
I'm not advocating breeding out-of-standard, or not showing and/or testing your breeding dogs, or not doing health tests, I am just suggesting that the "rating" of a breeder should consider all the aspects of that breeder's program, the state their particular breed, and the goals of the puppy buyer.
----
I leave you guys with this...
Maybe the Dunbars are on to something here (at the end of the video)???
Comments
Are those all black shiba pups?
As for breeding .... I bred for health and temperament. This litter was not bred for conformation but for pet companions. I bought the mother because she was unique and feel in love with her temperament/looks/personalty ... the whole package. She is papered, but obviously she isn't purebred and doesn't fit the standard. I went back as far as the great grandparent on the dam's side ... and believe the linage was lied about. (we weren't originally going to have a litter with her). Never the less, the mother is a wonderful companion and is an incredible dog ... we had a few interested family homes, so we decided to get her health testing done. Puppies are place in pet homes (by mostly family and friends). DO I plan to continue breeding this solid black into my program? Answer is no. The mother is NOT part of our breeding goals/program. All my other dogs are purebred and follow the standard. For our goals and program: We have selected to breed purebred Shiba's with healthy lines and good temperaments to better the breed. If any fail testing or do not suit what we are looking for, we will not use them.
I understand that many people disprove of me choosing to have this litter, but I do not want to hide or be ashamed of this litter or their mother. I am proud of ALL my dogs (whether they fit the standard or not) and would like to share them with whom ever is interested. This is why I posted my video.
Thank you for answering. I have a few more questions.
This was her second litter correct?
What about your pinto and creams that have been bred. Do you believe they muster up to the breed standards in your country? To the Japanese standard?
Do you think breeding non standard dogs improves the breed?
Your dogs are obviously well cared for and loved pets, that is not the issue. The issue I see is that breeding out of standard and known mixed breeds into your program will be detrimental to you as a reputable breeder when word gets around (and it has). That will make it very hard for you to find a quality dog so that you can achieve your breeding goals. I'm guessing that you don't want to be classified by the dog community as a backyard breeder, especially if you plan to get into Shikoku or Kai.
There are so many non related Shibas who are decent breed examples, that if the effort is put into it, being "too selective" won't be a problem. Intentionally breeding multiple dogs that are very out of standard, is just plain lazy, regardless if the temperment is nice. Plenty of decent dogs from decent breeders who have decent temperaments and great health already, you can't use that as an excuse to flaunt established standards.
I don't want to come off as attacking or anything, but you do have one more other dog that does not follow the standard but you are still planning on breeding according to your blog. Tina is a pinto (white tail tip, too much white marking) and therefore also non-standard.
You do have two dogs with famous Shiba kennels like Copperdot and Jogoso in their pedigrees. And I think I remember a Morningstar in a pedigree as well. Both Copperdot and Morningstar travel to Japan and import dogs from Japan so MirkaK's comment about in-breeding is not so relevant here.
Guess I can't understand why you won't make a clean break from breeding creams in the past and a pinto and seal in the present (Molly is a seal aka "bad black"). Maybe things are different in Canada but in the US that type of breeding practice within Shibas is a sure mark of a less reputable breeder who breeds for novelty rather than preservation.
----
Molly is probably a red (Ay-) with one dominant black gene (Kk). Normally the dominant black completely hides the red/yellow color like in the Belgium Sheepdog, but sometimes it doesn't and allows some color to go through. You'll often see this seal color in American Akitas.
Because Molly carries dominant black, she's able to produce black pups even though the sire may not carry any black genes.
As for where Molly's seal color comes from, it'll have to be from at least one black parent. Chows definately have dominant black. In Kai, it's not proven. In Shibas, definately not.
Yes, I have Tina ... but I wouldn't call her a pinto. She has a white tail tip. I thought pinto had to have half to two thirds white covering their bodies? Both her parents were to standard (one red the other correctly marked blk&tan). Wouldn't the white tip be considered just a fault. Yet there is a good chance her offspring could be perfectly marked. My question would be , with Tina's good temperament and health tests ... even though she has a white tip on her tail ... should she not be bred? If the answer is no, then should a shiba that carries the cream gene not be breed? As there would be a chance a visible cream pup could be born if both parents carry that gene! Just curious about your opinion.
As you would put it .. we are breaking clean from the seal!! We have decide not to breed her again. And for the creams ... I struggle with that one. My first Shiba was the cream. I see nothing wrong with them. They are gorgeous and make wonderful companions. Yet I do understand they are not of standard! We did however retire our cream to break away from that color as I am going in a different direction then when I first started (learn, change, grow). Did you know at first the Cream colored Shiba was in the Canadian Standard. There was actually a cream that got its Championship in the show rings. That was years ago and the standard changed ... but I am sure the standard will continue to change when a new generation decides it should be different (their way). As for my other dogs, yes, they come from very nice backgrounds ... I am very proud of their linage.
Lindsayt - No, I don't see myself as a backyard breeder and do not want to be referred as one. I put the time and money into my Shibas .. getting the testing that needs to be done, etc. I do feel that health and temperament are very important and do not use that as an excuse to have creams, or a Shiba with a white tipped tail. I am not a show breeder at this time (though I would like to get in there for the fun of it not the politics), but if other reputable breeders(show or not) would like to give input, etc on how i can better my stock or program, I will listen. We are all here because we love the breed and to work together to better the breed, right!
AFAIK, cream was put in Western standards due to people misunderstanding the NIPPO standard. Westerners got thrown by the concept of a landrace/Nihon Ken which included white (Kishu, Akita, Hokkaido). Have you read the more closely translated NIPPO standard?
There has been a cream Champion in the US as well (same dog named Kola) before people realized their error and changed this point in the standard. Now, they still need to work on lining up sizes to match NIPPO's. They need to do so with the clear understanding that the NIPPO heights are measured behind the shoulders and not at the shoulders. Which is another cultural difference to overcome.
I call Tina a pinto because that's the common language in the breed. It could also be called white spotting but it's the same group of genes that control both. Breeding extreme white spotting (ie. Tina) will produce pintos and vice versa. Mary Malone, the person who founded the Kai in the US, also was involved in the beginnings of the Shiba in the US. Her name has since become a near curse word in Shibas because she did deliberately breed/produce pintos in addition to the other colors, and some of her dogs did end up in petstore puppymill hands. She was able to produce the white bodied pintos by deliberately breeding pups with lots of white spots.
Since then, there was a notice that a colony of her Shibas had their AKC registration revoked. The AKC rarely ever revokes registration based on puppymills, but boy, do they act when the paperwork don't match the dogs! A lot of people who owned the descendants, even those not obtained via a petstore, were upset to learn that their registrations were pulled.
As to your question...
"with Tina's good temperament and health tests ... even though she has a white tip on her tail ... should she not be bred? If the answer is no, then should a shiba that carries the cream gene not be breed? As there would be a chance a visible cream pup could be born if both parents carry that gene! Just curious about your opinion."
...that's a false parallel. Tina would be the same as comparing a cream shiba, not a colored dog carrying a cream gene. (ie. Compare mismark with mismark.)
In terms of odds, breeding a cream shiba would guarantee that all the offsprings are carriers of cream. If the other parent dog carries cream, it's a 50% chance that the pups would be cream. Right off the bat, you can have 50% pets. Think of it as 50% restriction of your next generation to keep for breeding if you want to adhere to what reputable Shiba breeders do.
Breeding two colored dogs carrying creams would give the odds of 50% carriers and 25% cream. That's a 25% restriction of your next generation which gives you more flexibility.
I've seen the "seal" color in AAs. It's a gorgeous color, though of course in AAs it is allowed, unlike in Shibas. I didn't even know it could show up in Shibas.
As for the breeding issue: well, I really don't understand not breeding to standard. I really don't understand breeding a dog from very good lines to one that is not even purebred. (And I don't understand how she has papers if she's not purebred? Falsified papers? That makes me even more puzzled as to why you would breed her....) I mean, I guess I don't understand why doing that is different from the person I got Bel from, who was breeding Shibas to have a deeper chest, just because she liked the look. Granted, the person I got Bel from didn't do health testing, but....I mean, why spend so much money and effort on a line if you're going to breed mixed breeds into the line. I get that this dog has a great temperament, but that doesn't really justify it in my mind.
I understand that things that are carried in recessive genes are hard to gauge, and must be a huge disappointment to breeders when they show up (I have a dog with micro, after all, which means his parents must carry the gene, and I know that was an awful discovery for his breeder). But once you know, why would you continue to breed those dogs?
This all points out to me, again, how very complex breeding is, and how it really takes a lot of knowledge and careful thought and planning.
To be honest, it's hard for me to take you at face value that health is a breeding goal when I don't see any OFA information on the majority of dogs in your breeding program, some of whom have already had multiple litters. I'm glad to see you have provided direct links to Tina and for Takeo's *sire and dam* (though not Takeo himself). But if you encounter a savvy puppy buyer who knows that they can just as easily search the publicly accessible OFA database for themselves, how do you justify the lack of health testing on Molly? Or Cincin? Or Hiro? Or the fact that Tina has only been tested for patellas and preliminary hips, and not for thyroid, glaucoma, or any of the other health issues that Shibas are *known* to have?
As I write, I'm aware that I sound harsh... That's partly because I see this and the Shiba forum as places where breeders (like yourself, like the forum owners and others who have voiced their opinions in this thread) can openly share information and also where potential puppy buyers like myself can educate and become educated about how to make well-informed, ethical decisions about where to get our pups. That is, every thread is open to discussion. It's easy to share in the puppy cuteness, and to admire the bundles of fluffy joy that you've brought to this world. I agree with everyone that your pups ARE cute and they look like they're being brought up in a loving, safe environment -- as all your dogs are kept in a loving, caring home. I want to be clear that I'm not questioning your integrity as a proud "parent" to all your pets!
But as someone who's also done limited work in rescue, who's scoured Craiglist and Petfinder and shelter ads and knows the reality of Shibas in exploitable situations (most of whom were probably bred for the purpose of "mere" companionship), I am extremely suspicious of ANY attempt to promote "unusual" markings or coats in Shibas, especially when the markings fly in the face of established standards and appear to take precedence over genetic health. The information that ayk has shared with us, for example, is something that I would expect a breeder to *already* have studied before proceeding with matings; it should not have come as new knowledge to you. And what would you say to one of your puppy people if, against all better judgment, decides they HAVE to breed one of their little black Shibas that they purchased from you because she's extremely sweet, has a "rare" color, and they just want one of his/her puppies (never mind the others in the litter who also need good homes)?
I'm not expecting you to answer that question right now, but I hope it's something you will consider if you have not already. That's exactly the type of rationale that has come up again and again in scenarios that have caused our beloved Shiba to fall into compromised situations. And it's something that responsible breeders think about and do everything in their power to prevent from happening, partly by not falling for and modeling the same temptations in the first place.
I didn't find Takeo on the OFA database. His littermate sister is there though, so I would hope that the OFA would upload his results by now if they exist. He's out of half-siblings with a duplicate paternal grandmother and a maternal great-grandmother. Not my cup of tea to use such an inbred dog (outdated prepotent sire theory) but it's not uncommon in the dog world.
Teddy, Ebony, and Bliss were born on July 2010. They are littermates out of Winnie and an Atsumi import (via Morningstar kennels). They can't have official OFA Hip results until they are 2 years old.
Hiro was born April 2010. He won't have official OFA Hip results until 2012. He's slated to sire a litter in summer 2011 which may fall before official OFA Patellas as well (12 months of age minimum). :-( I don't know whether to blame his co-owner, Koyote Kennels, for this rush breeding or not. If I was a real puppy buyer, I would ask Koyote directly.
Winnie does have OFA hips and knees. The hips were done Jan 2011, so *after* the litter that produced Teddy, Ebony, and Bliss. Not great that it was done after the fact, but at least it's before her next litter in summer 2011.
As for Cincin, nothing comes up during my searches. She's slated for a summer 2011 repeat breeding.
IMO, I do agree with curlytails and do wish to see on all the breeding stock updated CERFs (with dates, renewed every 2 yrs), official OFA Patellas (12 months of age), and official OFA hips (2 yrs of age) or PennHip results. These are specifically pointed out on the National Shiba Club of America website as breed health concerns.
For foundation stock, especially originating from imports that have health gaps, I would also want to see some routine testing for thyroid and glaucoma (CERF can't detect glaucoma). Even though they didn't make the official NSCA list for breed health concerns (missed the statistics?), they greatly affect the quality of life for the dogs and their owners.
1. you are not protecting the breed or improving the overall temperament or the health of the breed. You are only improving the health and temperament of the puppys you just bred. This will not help the Shiba breed in general which is the goal of any reputable breeder. A reputable Shiba breeder will not be seeking out your puppys to include in their breeding program so this can't possibly help the breed. Reputable breeders work hard to protect their breed and to keep it pure.
2.How will you keep the puppys from being bred when they grow up. If they are used for breeding this will produce more mixed breed or non conforming dogs that may end up in pounds,puppy mills or used for dog bait. How will this help protect the Shiba breed?
There is no shortage of good purebred blood, so why is it neccessary to breed a mix or dog that does not fit the standard? In fact their is no shortage of mixed breed and non comforming Shibas. Check out petfinder or any rescue site or local shelter.
3. By knowingly breeding a dog with a questionable pedigree or that does not fit the standard you are sending out the message to every dog owner, backyard breeder and puppy mill, that it is ok breed their dog and it doesn't matter if it fits the standard or is full blooded or not. It is our job as reputable breeders to educate everyone on the proper ethics of dog breeding and breed protection.
4.This is exactly why lawmakers are repeatedly trying to introduce new bills to ban breeding. They want to target anyone who breed x amount of litters or own x amount of dogs and can't see that reputable breeders are not the problem. The real problems are Backyard Breeders and Puppy Mills.
Do you really think that they will be satisfied and not keep changing these laws until everyone is allowed only 1 or 2 dogs that are spayed and then they can only be of a certain breed since we have all the BSL s.
They have powerful groups like Peta and HSUS pushing them into these laws.These groups have money (which we unwittingly donate) that they give to these politicians under the guise of campain donations. If Peta and other similar groups acheive their goal there will be no more breeding and our canine companions will be extinct.
AKC, UKC, ADOA and other reputable dog groups are fighting hard to prevent these laws that are banning breeding and they need our help as reputable breeders to follow the Code of Ethics they promote in order to do this.
I am not trying to attack anyone here, but we all need to look at the bigger picture when we decide to breed. Are we protecting and helping the breed that we love so much or are we possibly hurting it?
Perhaps we need to look at our dogs not as pets and best friends when breeding but rather as dogs.
I am sure everyone of us can think of at least one reason to breed our best friend, but maybe we should focus also on the reasons not to breed also. If the reasons not to breed out weigh the reason to breed, maybe we should not be breeding them.
Marsha Short VTS
NAKA President
www.kai-ken.org
Are the best of the best shiba breeders not seeing allergies, structural or thyroid issues in their lines? That's pretty awesome if its true.
How do we get that kind of info, besides being an inquiring potential puppy buyer?
Does that make sense? Because its easy for a breeder to say they breed for health, but what does that mean to the specific breed? And how can a puppy buyer learn before their purchase?
Maybe this is for another discussion... but this thread brings up a ton of important points for the breeding side, and the buyer side.
There are laundry lists on this forum describing what a reputable breeder should be. Some of the best shiba and dog people I know, don't do things on those lists, including myself.
Some points I believe that are universal and generally agreed on when discussing a "reputable breeder" refers to a breeder who is respected by their peers, who shows or competes in some venue where the dogs are tested, provides a high level of care for their animals, performs the appropriate health tests as determined by their breed, and strives to follow guidelines set by their respective breed clubs or standards. Everything else is a bonus, but anything less is less than desirable.
----
I think the club community and the expectations set by rescue groups and informed consumers create an environment that makes it essentially impossible to effective "rate" a kennel's breeding program.
In business you have things set in place, credentials a business will work to achieve, government programs created to force a standard (in service, health ...), or organization like the Better Business Bureau.... but breeders are not supposed to operate like a business or they are labeled as "mills", which then allows breeder to escape the already effective corporate rating systems.
Then, on the flip side, you have the breed clubs and larger kennel clubs, who are run by an inner-circle of breeders/judges, who base most of their core values and decision on the politics of the breed. Any breeder who falls outside that inner circle, or who is not accepted by one of the members of the inner-circle, is labeled as a BYB. While at the same time I know of breeder who are members of an "inner circle" who do none of the things listed by Lindsay and also mix "out crossed" lines to achieve a "look" (things a "BYB" would do)... yet these breeds are still considered "reputable" due to their connection to the inner-circle.
Then you have the various groups who are focused on documenting the health of a breed. But they are so few and so selectively focused that they really only track one very small aspect of a dog's overall health (hips, knees, eyes...). These organizations, while they do add some value tracking these specific issues, really only end up becoming a marketing platform for breeds and allows them to ignore other (in some cases more serious) health issues.
To me, this is very similar to the show world, where dogs are marketed as "champions", which allows breeders to ignore health testing and hide behind ribbons, or the working word where schutzhund titles allows breeder to market their dogs as "working dogs" and help hide their poor health. Add them together (health tests + titles) and you have a pretty good marketing campaign - and in some cases all it took to get was the purchase of a few dogs who were already titled and tested (not a huge effort on purchasers part but now they are a "reputable breeder").
This becomes particularly sinister, IMHO, in a small private club like the UKC where the overall organization is a for-profit venture and therefore profits from these same marketing machines that mediocre breeders hide behind.
So, my point is, it's a crap-shoot. Are their good breeders out there that truly care about their program and the health of that breed - YES! Are those same breeders meeting all of Lindsay's list, maybe. Could those same breeds be hiding most of the difficult choices that come up in every breeding program on earth and would cause people to question choices - FOR SURE THEY ARE!
When it comes to picking a breeder I think a potential owner should pick a breeder based on how comfortable they are with that person and their (breeding) goals.
I'm not advocating breeding out-of-standard, or not showing and/or testing your breeding dogs, or not doing health tests, I am just suggesting that the "rating" of a breeder should consider all the aspects of that breeder's program, the state their particular breed, and the goals of the puppy buyer.
----
I leave you guys with this...
Maybe the Dunbars are on to something here (at the end of the video)???
----