New UK Breeding Standards for Show Dogs

Artificial insemination is a common practice among dog breeders. In 2003, a female champion black standard poodle named Yes was conceived using 25-year-old frozen semen from another champion named Snapper, who died in 1990. It is highly unusual to use frozen semen that old and Yes’ extraordinary success as a product of artificial insemination using old semen is also highly unusual, according to Katie Thomas in Keeping Championship Bloodlines Alive (The New York Times, February 11, 2009). Another breeder recently used 20-year-old semen to produce a litter of Irish Wolfhounds. She and her partner were surprised at how different the litter bred from the “heirloom” semen looked in comparison to the Irish Wolfhounds of today.

The selective breeding of dogs to produce certain traits has been a common practice for several hundred years. Initially, this was done for practical purposes, such as hunting, herding, and retrieving. However, with the increasing popularity of dog shows, physical features and personality traits have been bred into and out of each dog species that may have nothing to do with a particular breed’s function and are simply a matter of fashion. Some of these traits may have been anomalies, abnormalities, or aberrations that would actually give the animal an evolutionary disadvantage in the wild. And some have caused health problems, especially in the case of inbreeding.

The benefits of artificial insemination, besides allowing the breeding of dogs from a long distance, include adding variety to the gene pool, which can become quite stagnant through inbreeding, and the ability to preserve and reintroduce old traits that may have been bred out of a particular breed, especially if the semen was produced before a particular health problem was introduced into the breed. This type of ”heirloom” semen may become quite valuable in light of a recent movement in the UK to address the ethics of breeding for fashion that may produce unhealthy traits in a dog breed.

New breeding standards have been introduced by The Kennel Club (UK) for 209 dog species, including the classic British bulldog, which, under the new requirements, will have a shrunken face, a sunken nose, longer legs, and a leaner body, much to the outrage of professional breeders and pedigree dog societies (Healthier New Bulldog Will Lose Its Churchillian Jowl; The New York Times, January 14, 2009). This change came after public outcry about breeding practices, following a BBC One documentary, Pedigree Dogs Exposed, which was aired last summer. Judges have been instructed to use new breed standards and inbreeding has been banned. However, many judges are also breeders and there is much opposition to the controversial changes.

Many bulldogs must undergo artificial insemination in order to conceive because mating is anatomically difficult. Most give birth by Caesarean section because the puppies’ large heads get stuck in the birth canal of the small-hipped female bulldog, making natural birthing difficult and dangerous. The bulldog has long been a symbol of strength but the traits that have been bred into it, such as the massive chest and pronounced underbite, actually make it physically weaker. Other breeds that will be affected by the new mandate include the Shar Pei, with its trademark skin folds that cause eye and skin problems, and the Pekingese, which has a flat face that causes breathing problems. These changes will, of course, take years as healthy traits are bred back in and unhealthy traits removed. (An example in the cat world would be the pushed in faces of Persian cats and the resultant blocked tear ducts that cause eye drainage problems.)

If the American Kennel Club (AKC) hasn’t been inspired by the decisive actions of its counterpart across the pond, I hope it is soon. I have always wondered why the Humane Society hasn’t done more about this issue. The thought of a female bulldog somehow being separated from her family and getting pregnant as a stray, only to die a painful death birthing her puppies because humans have designed her to be unfit for the most natural of physical functions is abhorrent to me, not to mention horrifying in its inherent cruelty. This should have been illegal right from the start. The attitude that an animal is a “product” to be engineered for human use, study, and convenience is one that I feel should have been obsolete by now. There are arguments pro and con regarding the use of animals for food, clothing, and research, and I don’t intend to discuss those any further. However, there is no excuse or rationalization that can justify or provide any validity to the manipulation of animal DNA for sheer vanity and human entertainment, as is evident in the breeding of show dogs.

I applaud the UK Kennel Club for its immediate and decisive action on behalf of show dogs. It is easy to assume that these are pampered animals leading luxurious lives. We hear so much about the plight of mutts and stray dogs, but pedigree animals suffer from a unique brand of cruelty that affects their health and the integrity of their bloodlines. Dog breeding is big business and it is minimally regulated. There are many reputable dog breeders but puppy mills abound. I hope the United States follows in the footsteps of the United Kingdom and recognizes the need to protect the health of show dogs and all dogs that are bred for sale.

Blog 4