Originally Posted by LegalEagle

Or do you think the bad ones would just lie about testing anyway?

Originally Posted by LegalEagle

Ninaspoodles, I think most posters here would agree that conformation showing is not inherently bad and that it is not necessary to show your dog in conformation, but that you should prove your dog and breed to the standard. I haven't seen anyone here who posts something who contradicts it, and I agree with mom24doggies that you've put it beautifully. But one thing I think julietcr and some others were saying earlier is that people are selective in what they breed for. People who only do conformation MAY neglect important poodly characteristics (e.g., affinity for water), while people who breed their poodles for Schutzhund (none do to my knowledge, but I'd love to see it!) may neglect others (e.g., eye shape).

Whatever type of competition you do, you can only be judged within its parameters. Just like they don't judge conformation at agility trials, they don't judge training, drive and athleticism at conformation trials. Someone who breeds to show in conformation is only getting judged on what a judge can tell in the ring: appearance and attitude. (I count structure as part of appearance, as a perfectly sound poodle with the body shape of a golden retriever would NOT be rewarded because it doesn't look poodly).

But that person is not getting judged on whether their poodle is a good water retriever, because they don't have lakes in the conformation ring. And being a good water retriever is about temperament, affinity for water, and focus, as well as proper structure. There is no way for a dog show judge to know whether a poodle is a good water retriever, although that is a part of its history and should be a part of the standard. Therefore, water retrieving is not a trait that is rewarded in the ring. Therefore, it is a trait that MAY not be bred for by people who breed only to show in conformation. So to the extent that breeders do conformation to the EXCLUSION of other types of proving, you could easily end up with a dog that LOOKS like a poodle but doesn't have some other important poodly traits. Someone was remarking earlier how hard it is to find a "birdy" poodle, which is quite sad considering that birds are what poodles were originally bred to retrieve.

This doesn't mean conformation showing is bad, necessarily. Just that, as you say, there are other ways of being a responsible breeder, and it is probably best for a given breed if different breeders are proving their dogs in different ways. (If breeders of English Bulldogs, for example, did ANYTHING athletic with them, they would probably look like the stocky robust exemplars of the early twentieth century rather than the tottering, can't-hardly-breathe versions of today.)

Originally Posted by ninaspoodles

So question then, I am still a co-beeder and learning some of the finer details. So when you get health testing done through your veteranarian of choice, does it not automatically get posted with OFA? How does that part work? Does anyone know? I am aware of the tests poodles should get, however as far as posting them anywhere I haven't got a clue :S
Thanks in advance!

Originally Posted by PaddleAddict

I don't think anyone would ever argue for a huge amount of inbreeding. Ideally, you want to breed as diversely as possible (for the most part, there are good arguments for careful linebreeding) within the breed. However, keep in mind that with established purebreds, the gene pool is closed. What you have is what you have, unless you want to introduce new genes from a different breed (Google LUA Dalmatians for some interesting reading on that).

Originally Posted by LegalEagle

Guilty as charged! Maybe julietcr is too - maybe that's why she's asking questions!

I think that is also why I find the idea of breeding a more diverse pool of poodles is so intuitively appealing. Because, even though I don't know much about purebred dog genetics, it seems like making the breed MORE inbred - the inevitable result of limiting reproduction to the "elect" - isn't a great idea. But maybe that's not right...?

I definitely think health testing is a good idea, by the way. But I can understand why someone might want to see some studies or data about its effect.

Originally Posted by julietcr1

I definitely think health testing is a good idea to but I am concern about health testing being some sort of an "ok" for breeders to continue inbreeding or linebreeding dogs with "carriers" and "clear" results since they will not transmit the specific genetic diseases. If we health test but still inbreed or linebreed it's a complete non sens for me.

Originally Posted by julietcr1

I agree that the gene pool is "closed" within a breed, and I hope all breeders know that. I don't agree that "what you have is what you have unless you introduce new genes from a different breed". Introducing new genes from a different breed is a solution but other less drastic solutions exist like outcrossing and outbreeding in the same breed. I am curious to know if breeders here outcross or outbreed and if they do it how and why.

Originally Posted by Chagall's mom

I preface this with saying I know bupkis about the subject, but long ago (2009) bookmarked this post in an old thread. It may have some relevance here.