# Inbreeding.. When Is Ok??



## DILLEMMA (Apr 22, 2008)

Ok Guys And Gals.. I Have A Q Here And Dont Want Anyone To Knock Me For It.. Its Just A Question. Is It Ok To Inbreed At All? I Know Professional Breeders May Do This To Try And Strengthen Genes Of A Particular Bloodline. But What Exactly Makes It "ok" For Them To Do It. Ive Heard Something About Inbreeding Causing To Much Of The Same Genes Into A Pup And Causing It To Be Retarded Or Deformed Or Both. But Lets Say You Have Two Littermates. The F Of The Of The Two Is Black W/ White Chest And Paws And Her Build And Characteristics Represents The Bottom Half Of Her Pedigree Which Contains Streamlined, Game Bred Dogs Such As Vetzels, Clearys, Pure Power And Back To Carvers, Boomerang, Heinzls, Corvino And So On. The Male Is A Light Red Brindle With White Paws And Chest And His Characteristics Represent The Top Half Of Their Pedigree Which Is Full Of Showdogs(most Recent In The Top Half Is Some Grayline, Tony's Showtime, And Mostly Grch Show Dogs All The Way Back And Mostly Blues)he Gets His Red From His Grandmother , An Extremely Game Bred Red Female Which From What I Know Reps James Vetzels Stock All Day Long. The Two Are Nothing Alike In Terms Of Looks And Persona. Both Are Very Intelligent In Their Own Way. The Dogs Are Posted Here Below If You Wanna Look. Any Comments Would Be Appreciate. Just To Let Everyone Know, I Owned The Mother Of The 2, She Got Stolen From My Yard. I Kept The Red Male. I Sold Hte Black Female To A Girl I Knew, We Later Started Living Together, So Thats Why Two Dogs Of The Same Litter, 1 M, 1 F Are Together Without Being Spayed Or Nuetered. While I Was At Work My Girlfriend Accidentally Let Them Lock Up And Couldnt Get Them Apart, By The Time I Got Home It Was Too Late. The Pups Are 4 Weeks Old Now. The Litter Consisted Of 2 Blue Still Borns. The Rest Of The 5 Pups (small Litter Probably Because Of This) Are Awesome. At 4 Weeks They Are Already Started Developing Personalities And Seem Intelligent So Far. But Again They Are Only 4 Weeks. I Know I Risk Everyone Talking Smack About This Procedure, But I Would Only Like To Hear From Very Experienced Breeders That Have Something To Go On, Not Just Hearsay.. Thanks Again... And Again , It Was An Accident, I Am Not That Type Of Person, The Dogs Have Been Living Together For Almost 3 Years Without Any Other Accidents.


----------



## Patch-O-Pits (Jan 12, 2008)

I'm just going to touch on this topic briefly...

Here is a link about inbreeding
http://www.ukcpitbull.com/encyclopedia2/tiki-index.php?page=Inbreeding

The outward appearance of the dog is not the only thing that needs to be considered when doing a breeding.

Inbreeding can make the best of the best but also the worst of the worst because It doubles up on certain genes.

To me it would be Ok if :
- it was a totally researched planned out breeding
- The dogs both met the standard in all aspects from structure, drive/unworkability, temperament and healthy 
-The dogs are health tested, are titled 
- The breeder was prepared to cull pups
- The breeder was prepared to keep the whole litter
- it was done to better/ improve on the line


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

I think its ok under very stringent guidlines. First there must be a solid reason and you must have a definite goal. Also the very toughest culling should be involved. Only the very best should be kept and I would not do it more than once in a 4 generation cycle. I will very likely do it myslef. Also inbreeding is defined it several ways, some say inbreeding is only father/daughter, son/mother or brother sister. Othes say that even grandaprent/grandchild is inbreeding. Some consider that line breeding.


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

I was told by the UKC and ADBA that only Full brother/sister is considered inbreeding because thats the only match that has no outside gene pool. Any breeding other that that of relatives would be line breeding. I personally never breed litter mates or full brother sister. I will do half if siblings. As Patch said you have to be very careful because you may strengthen the good but you will also be strengthening any bad that is in the lines.


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

> As Patch said you have to be very careful because you may strengthen the good but you will also be strengthening any bad that is in the lines.


Which is why you need to cull hard and by that I mean AT LEAST spay/neutering all pups produced that do not have the BEST desired qualities and traits.


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

OldFortKennels said:


> Which is why you need to cull hard and by that I mean AT LEAST spay/neutering all pups produced that do not have the BEST desired qualities and traits.


What do you mean by at least?

What would be at most? I think spay/neuter is plenty enough for culling.


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

at most, putting down to put it nicely.


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

Thats what I was thinking. I just see no need to put any down. Spay/neutering is enough. They can still make great pets and I think it is plain stupid to breed something and kill babies that have no need to be killed. If they don't need to live they should never be made no matter what good ones you get out of it.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Just think of it as euthanasia. Sometimes it is the right thing to do.


----------



## CaSk (Aug 18, 2006)

american_pit13 said:


> Thats what I was thinking. I just see no need to put any down. Spay/neutering is enough. They can still make great pets and I think it is plain stupid to breed something and kill babies that have no need to be killed. If they don't need to live they should never be made no matter what good ones you get out of it.


*First before we get all pissy back and forth if it was not for culling we would not have the APBT we have today. IMO there is not enough breeder's that cull dogS because they see dollar signs instead of health and the population of the breed. Because 50 percent of a purchase litter in my opinion will be breed by the buyer some point in time in the dogs life. So if the breeder in the first place sold a unhealthy our shit dog it going to get bred and carry nothing but bad traits again. Another thing what would you do if say you had a litter and a dog came out with a missing leg our had bad pigment our some kind of deformity our so on. You go to raise it and sell it our give it away? Sometimes you cant be all soft about things. Pit bulls are one of the most breed dogs the people that dont cull our just go out and buy dogs and keep breeding is one of the reasons there is so much junk pitbulls all the manbiters that are causing bsl. *


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

If they are spay/neutered then how are they going to be bred and pass on bad traits? Manbiters are made by bad raising. If you had any litter that throws something so bad the dog must be killed to whole damn litter should not have been bred. Why in the world would you ever breed a litter that will have puppies with missing legs? If there is an issue with a pup not due to breeding then yes it should be put down. I have had 3 pups put down from litters due to medical issues that where in no way genetic. If a dog has bad pigment way can't it be spayed or neutered? Why must it die? I believe people that think this way don't see any value in a dog that can't be bred. Why can't it just be loved as a pet? It has nothing to do with being soft lol.. believe me I am far from soft, however like I said if you are breeding a litter that will throw such bad defects to have to kill puppies then the litter should not be bred. Any "good ones" could be carriers of anything you cull for. So they in turn should also not be bred.


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

buzhunter said:


> Just think of it as euthanasia. Sometimes it is the right thing to do.


because it is not what was wanted out of the breeding doesn't make it the right thing.


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

CaSk said:


> *First before we get all pissy back and forth if it was not for culling we would not have the APBT we have today. *


If it was not for fighting we would not have the breed we have today but do you still fight?

No one is being at all pissy this is a discussion and peoples opinions.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

american_pit13 said:


> because it is not what was wanted out of the breeding doesn't make it the right thing.


Well there is a big difference between asthetics and outright deformaties or unstable dogs. No breeder wants to be in the position where they have to say "don't tell anyone where you got it from". LOL


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

buzhunter said:


> No breeder wants to be in the position where they have to say "don't tell anyone where you got it from". LOL


LOL..Thats funny.


----------



## CaSk (Aug 18, 2006)

american_pit13 said:


> If they are spay/neutered then how are they going to be bred and pass on bad traits? Manbiters are made by bad raising. If you had any litter that throws something so bad the dog must be killed to whole damn litter should not have been bred. Why in the world would you ever breed a litter that will have puppies with missing legs? If there is an issue with a pup not due to breeding then yes it should be put down. I have had 3 pups put down from litters due to medical issues that where in no way genetic. If a dog has bad pigment way can't it be spayed or neutered? Why must it die? I believe people that think this way don't see any value in a dog that can't be bred. Why can't it just be loved as a pet? It has nothing to do with being soft lol.. believe me I am far from soft, however like I said if you are breeding a litter that will throw such bad defects to have to kill puppies then the litter should not be bred. Any "good ones" could be carriers of anything you cull for. So they in turn should also not be bred.


*I understand where you comming from. Also manbiters can be from how there raised but there are some pit bulls that are raised great and are still heavily dominate to humans and in a breeding program those need to be culled. Not all dogs can be placed fixed our not. It be great to be able to place dogs and know they are going to good homes. BUTTTTT You can do all the research on who you give the dog to and even know the person and there still a good chance that dog will go to somebody else. Also i would not want it to come back on me because of what some dog did that was not culedl. I believe if a breeder don't cull at all in his program he should not breed.*


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

CaSk said:


> [B Also manbiters can be from how there raised but there are some pit bulls that are raised great and are still heavily dominate to humans and in a breeding program those need to be culled. [/B]


Any dog that is born a man biter would affect the litter whether in a dominant trait or recessive. Either way its in the genes whole litter should not be and parent should not be bred.


----------



## CaSk (Aug 18, 2006)

american_pit13 said:


> Any dog that is born a man biter would affect the litter whether in a dominant trait or recessive. Either way its in the genes whole litter should not be and parent should not be bred.


Ya a good point but which ever one showed it should be culled and if any that dident show it and had a litter and either one of them showed it be culled also either way culling is used to take out bad traits in dogs weither it something stupid. either way there some circumstances where i maybe would place a dog if i was going to cull it. Okay let me some it up if it was a razor edge our some bully crap id place it if it was a game dog it be culled.


----------

