Common goals derived from differing ideologies

For Diversity Guidelines we follow CLICK HERE

• We never question the resolve of another breeder to do things in the best interest of their dogs.  It seems many are constantly explaining their position and stance, about their ideologies and beliefs, to us when there is no need to.  If we're challenged we simply point out in our conversation where things were said that were unfounded and uncalled for.  We might make assumptions based upon that conversation, but in the end what we offer is to listen and possibly absorb some of the good from any conversation and maybe make some of it our own or walk away knowing the other side of a conversation may make some of what we do their own.  

We owe it to our friends to improve their outlook

• Both parties can only come away thinking about the mission statement on the other side of the conversation and weigh where it might have some common ground.  And very often there is so much in common its just uncanny.  You just can't realize how similar much of the goals are among other breeders with a passion for improving the outlook of their dogs until they decide to actually talk to one another, instead of standing behind the facade of a fan-page or website and feeding the flames of an argument to their audience.  Which BTW... we never do.  We only share our experiences here.  Which for some reason really gets under the skin of some other breeders like we somehow named them.  But, we don't do that and clearly if they feel compelled to engage us then somewhere along the lines of our sharing our experience they might feel much of what we are touching upon has a focus on what they do.   Well, if that's the case then its not like we bashed them, but they do seem to identify with what we presented as being directed at them.  HMMMM???

**Some things we believe are just addressing common problems from a different angle.

• We already made it clear that we respect the position of many breeders who ultimately look for an improvement with each litter they've produced.  And we have come to points of worry about our own dogs where we do and have tested our foundation using traditional methods of physical testing.  For our own peace of mind in understanding the physiology of what we call our own.  However, we will always favor conclusive answers based on Genetic test results when ever possible.  

Ground Zero for Diversity Planning, research your puppy

• It also doesn't sit well with us to participate in contributing information into an already skewed set of statistics.  We have experienced worrying about physical problems with our dogs and have traditional physical tests performed  whenever necessary to ascertain whether what we see is a result of injury or physiology.  Or if something we're witnessing visually can be determined as congenital, hereditary and degenerative.  Again information we don't need to share.  But, it is information we have clearly used and continually learn from.

** And we clearly don't hesitate to omit a dog from our program if there is a problem.  

Let me put it how we understand it from a purely Medical perspective, Genetic perspective and Veterinary perspective.

Without complete data you're just guessing

• Unless you test The Parents in front of you, and all their siblings and all the puppies produced by these parents and all their siblings...and all the Parent's of all these Parents and all their Cousin's and all Grandparent's and all their siblings and all the puppies from all the Aunts and Uncles and all their siblings and all the puppies of all those siblings and all the parent's of all those Grand Aunts and Uncles ....so on and so on.  You're staring at an entirely incomplete set of data when you finally take a look at the statistics provided from all these physical tests.  And since all throughout these decades of testing ONLY one or two dogs from any given liter, or one great grandparent or grand Aunt or cousin having been tested there is certainly nothing conclusive to make confident selective breeding choices from this incomplete set of data and no logical way of setting an effective baseline of measure with all the missing information.  You're effectively rolling the Dice and taking a Gamble based on an incomplete collection of data.  Conclusive baseline measures would be gathered from testing every 10,000 dogs out of a 10,000 dog population, not 10 dogs out of every 1000.  Really grade school here, but easy to understand.  Anything less is still a shot in the dark. 

If the tool doesn't work, try one that will

• Can these stats reflect positively?  Yup, very easily.  The figures can also skew either way if its based on just a small percentage of the entire population and fate gives you mostly bad or mostly good specimens in that pool.   If all you test is a just small percentage of the population that does pass then the results anyone presents will reflect a positive shift using just the segment that was tested.  But, if you fail to test the entire population and only have maybe 10% contribution then you have given yourself based on statistics a baseline measurement with a 90% portion of missing information that may not reflect the same.  Again all this points to a big "shot in the dark" gamble.  Rendering the 10% baseline about as usable and trustworthy as a broken tool.  

**Its supposed to fix something, but it just doesn't work.

• So based on simple logic and the fact that in all the decades these tests have been available and incomplete there has been no significant change statistically in either direction, Chatham Hill Dogs chooses not to participate in contributing results into a system of scoring based on physical test results that is in itself already inconclusive, incomplete and completely random in the answers provided.  Answers that clearly don't cure or fix the specimen.  In the end its a selective choice the breeder needs to make.  And common sense would tell any breeder that sees a visible eye problem that was not a result of injury, that there is something wrong here in this dog that may be a degenerative hereditary or congenital issue and passed onto offspring.  However, In their determination to maintain some of the phenotype or perhaps the temperament or the physical prowess of a specific lineage, breeders who put more emphasis on their success in competitions and trials will often choose to breed a poor specimen with a specimen that passed with flying colors to dilute the possibilities of that negative trait from popping up in the resulting litter.  

The British Monarchy was line bred

• But, now all these pups are carriers for a negative trait that was only diluted through this breeding.  And typically a competition driven breeder will look to the litters they produced to keep what they determine to be the "best" picks from that litter in the hopes of keeping some of the magic they believe will win those coveted trophies they identify as the measure of their success.  And this is where you see the repetition of negative traits that pop up again and become common to specific lines of dogs.   Since those targeted dogs eventually also get bred to and from down the road, further perpetuating the negative traits endemic to those specific lineages of champion dogs.  It's a quest for a short term goal of achieving a championship versus a quest for a long term goal of a longer lifespan with a strengthened immune system.  What they do with their dogs is really their business, but the way they've been doing it is the enabler for perpetuating the common health problems in our dogs.

• How can this BE?  Well, as an example in humans... breeding to maintain royal bloodlines didn't work for the British Royalty.  They wound up with hemophilia and shortened lifespans and lots of miscarriages.  And there are plenty of recent examples in human history of isolated populations that eventually had accelerated cases of poor health due to limited diversity and unavoidable inbreeding that occurred over just several decades of isolation.  If the Kings and queens of England were supposed to be the purity of humanity at the time.  Then that theory certainly fell flat on its face.  And the really sad part is, that with what we've learned from it... we're now still doing it to our purebred dogs.  Maybe instead of focusing on the outcomes from combining from close line breeding, the process can instead be retooled and focused on being as distantly related as possible.

Tristan Da Cunha, AKA Asthma Island

• As a recent example of isolated population genetics Tristan da Cuhna is an island in the South Atlantic that serves as an excellent example of isolated population genetics at work.  Literally a man made situation where a human population isolated to these islands which served as a wayward stop for many sailing vessels throughout the past century.  Basically, the founding population had asthma.  And further settlers to the island also came with asthma.  Through interbreeding the condition became endemic to this isolated population of people.  Asthma as a native Tristan Da Cuhnian is sort of an identity to this manmade artificially isolated pocket of humans. Again life lessons that mirror what we've done to our pedigree dogs.  Since each breed is literally an isolated pocket of limited genetic diversity.  Each dog breed is a mirror of Tristan da Cunha island.

One of the best, if not the greatest, athlete of our generation

And even if we took the best example of an all around athlete from our generation like.... "Bo Jackson".   You'll find that his career was short lived even though he began as a perfect example of athleticism.  Bo did Basketball, Bo did Football and Bo did Baseball.  Bo did Track and field and anything Bo wanted to do ... until a degenerative condition that was in his family history, blew out his hip.   Effectively ending his athletic career.  Ironically this injury didn't even happen while he was competing in sports, it happened on his leisure time.  He underwent extensive hip replacement and attempted a comeback, but quickly faded away into history.  Which is what happens time and again with purebred dogs.  With diversity planning taken out of the equation everything else fails.  

Perfect specimen visually with bad hips

And of course that's not saying the the great Bo Jackson was a result of line breeding.  Instead, he was a result of fate and human emotions like love, not selective breeding with human intervention or due to being isolated on an island with a small population. And there certainly was no questioning prior to his conception about the health histories between his parents lineages.  That's a big difference.  The British royalty were purposely selected and planned with human intervention.  However, if we know the condition of what we have in front of us and are capable of deciding the outcome of the results using this information, then we don't have to allow fate in the equation.  We can make an educated decision and select based on a combination of all the things we feel are important.   We can have a positive effect on the outcome.  Knowing the ingredients we have to work with.  While still looking to add more ingredients from a uniquely different source.

Diversity planning is clearly much more successful at resolving far more problems than a physical test.  Especially since Diversity planning offers fewer chances of these negative traits that are endemic to specific lines of dogs from doubling up  and presenting in offspring due to Champion dog syndrome, line breeding, and a limited genetic stock due to artificially isolated small breeding populations created by humans.  Avoiding incestuous mating and using informed decisions instead of fate effectively breaks the cycle.

Diversity planning coming right at you

Chatham Hill Dogs is now looking at excellent results from our efforts based on a proof of concept to prove the advantages of diversity planning.

From a foundation of dogs that are not related.  And our mettle on this stance has been acknowledged by the former haters either becoming silent when asked to compare statistics or other breeders who (understandably) wish to remain silent partners asking us for help or sadly by some veterans just refusing to believe our outcomes and calling it just plain luck.

• Getting people to understand your perspective is really never accomplished fanning flames for starting an argument.  That just creates division which ultimately breeds hatred and contempt.

if you want to give your opinion in your own public venues.... thats different.   But an opinion without first presenting the stance of the subject of your opinion... again just breeds contempt.  

• The benefits of social medium such as Facebook, Twitter, Blogs or Personal Websites is that it offers a place to state your agenda, share it with family, friends and people interested while spending far less time away from the wife and kids in another 2+ hour conversation with yet another breeder who feels compelled to keep repeating their ideologies to us.  We already know their agenda, they're the same ones that have been repeated to the public for decades now.   We just don't agree with all of them.  And Social media kind of affords us the opportunity to not have to repeat ourselves while allowing for you the viewer to change the channel if you don't like what you see.

Breeders make decisions on behalf of their breed of choice

• We've stated that medical information is private and disclosure of such information in the hands of haters often winds up skewed and misrepresented to bolster their own beliefs and fan flames of their misguided hate, often before they know anything about us. We do share things with our clients.  And as an example, we've used the choice to not disclose our children's medical information as an analogy as to why we don't post this information publicly.   However, we are not humanizing our  dogs since they are not in a position to make decisions like a grown human adult.  We make decisions for them.  As such we don't feel that the disclosure of information on a website for the benefit of any specific breed club we don't belong to or ever wish to join, or any curious breeder passing judgement before knowing who we are, relevant or in the interest of protecting our privacy.  Nor do we need to go on about it.  Children are planned, nurtured, become self aware then grow up and become adults who make their own educated (or non educated) decisions.  Dogs are purchased.  They are a form of property, for companionship, for security, for therapy, for disability assistance, for search-rescue and for many people a reflection of themselves.  But, what you do with your personal information about the things that are yours and with whom you share it with... is entirely your business.

Our generation has much to fear from sharing information

• Coming from a background of Information Technology (our real careers).  We know how easy it is for anyone with malicious intentions to use much of this information to really make life miserable for the people who choose to openly share it.  Being that we have been the target of much malice from veteran's in this game.  Well... need we say more?

 • BTW... from our experience, when we've approached many (veteran) old school breeders in the past... we really were just another family looking for a pet, with the option to possibly breed in the future.  They made it clear then why they don't do that.  More to the tune of .... to own one of my dogs you have to get involved with Showing,  trials and proving things at a competitive level, not to mention the fact that they would insure maintaining a stake of ownership in the dog just in case it does become a Champion and can make them more money.  Basically telling us that we will have to pay for rights to raise what amounts to their puppy.  And that we would need to prove the dog is worthy of breeding for them by achieving titles for events that really don't apply in modern society except to to prove to like minded breeders that it will cost you to stud with this dog or brood with this bitch.  Again, a title is not a measure in our eyes or in the eyes of the public majority of what the world finds worthy as a dog's prerequisite for breeding.   Especially with the odds of that Champion being line bred for its purpose.

Most breeders require titles before you can breed their dog

• Why point this out?  Simply because the market demand for these dogs is not driven by the competition segment.  Its the consumer market that drives the demand for more puppies of a certain breed.  The quest to own something unique and uncommon yet bid-able to mold its character into a reflection of ourselves.  So its rather self defeating for our pure breeds to cater to the market segment that put these pure bred dogs into the situation they are today.  It would make more sense to meet the demands of the market that actually wants a longer return for their investment in your puppy.   And to actually exercise breeding practices that do promote a strengthened immune system.  Offering you the buyer more time with your dog and less time figuring out how to pay the Veterinary bills.

All the reason for breeding is in the eye of the beholder

To all the other breeders out there.  Veterans or newbies.  Respectfully.  As always, good luck.

Cheers