A Vent about a Bad Breeder I accidentally found

[gmacleod]

Originally Posted by Bridget D

...from another website... it is from the American Boxer Club:

Information on White Boxers

Why white boxers should never be bred

Regardless of the information available to breeders about the reasons why white Boxers should not be bred, there are still some breeders out there who choose to breed dogs of unacceptable colors. White markings result from the lack of pigment cells, a lack of color, so-to-speak. This is true of white markings found on 'flashy' dogs and to white Boxers or checks. A boxers white markings are 'inherited' from a dog's parents, one gene each, from sire and dam. The gene associated with whites is the (sw) gene which is what gives us the coat color of the white boxer. A 'plain/classic' dogs color results when the dog has at least one copy of the dominant S gene. Flashy boxers (those with white markings on the face, legs, chest and belly) have one copy of the solid S gene, and one copy of the recessive sw gene. White and check boxers have two copies of the recessive sw gene.

White boxers, when bred, can produce more health problems than their colored counterparts, including deafness in colored dogs. Often, these breeders state that breeding flasy dogs together should not be allowed and is unethical as they produce whites. However, they also are quick to point out that whites bred to plain dogs produce entire litters of flashy puppies. What then should be done with the resulting flashy puppies out of the white X plain breeding?

The main 'excuse' for these breeders to include whites in their breeding programs, is they claim the individual dog is of high quality, or, they claim that they are 'expanding' the gene pool. Both, are usually, and almost always incorrect. First, ANY REPUTABLE BREEDER will place a white on a spay/neuter contract. The only breeders who do not are usually pet/BYBs. These dogs are not bred to the breed standard, and are usually mediocre at best. Secondly, the argument regarding the gene pool is false. These dogs have colored littermates, and likely, half brothers and sisters from previous breedings. There are enough colored animals of quality out there to negate any arguement for breeding whites, and enough diversity overall.

A quote from George M. Strain Associate Vice Chancellor Office of Research & Graduate Studies Louisiana State University -

"It is my opinion that white boxers carry a version of the regulatory gene that causes over- expression of the piebald gene, producing heavy white color, blue eyes, and deafness. Breeding these dogs back into the boxer gene pool will very likely increase the overall incidence of deafness in ALL boxers (white or otherwise). I do not know the genetics of BCM, but it is not likely that white boxers are free of the defect, and nothing associated with pigmentation (or its absence) should logically protect against BCM. Breeding a white boxer without BCM back into the breed gene pool is not likely to affect BCM incidence, and in fact could worsen it if BCM is polygenic and the white boxer carries some of the responsible genes. If asked, I would be opposed to breeding white boxers -- to either whites or colors. If this practice is continued the prevalence of deafness in all boxers will increase as has happened with other breeds. I know that there is a strong group of advocates for white boxers, mostly because there is always attraction to something novel. To me it seems totally without logic to continue a breeding practice which, based on all available knowledge, will increase the prevalence of hereditary disease in a dog breed."

Are you sure that is from the ABC? It looks to have been uplifted from the personal letter written by Dr Strain to a former moderator of this website... (and which you'd find in the sticky thread at the top of the genetics forum)

[Bridget D]

Originally Posted by gmacleod

Are you sure that is from the ABC? It looks to have been uplifted from the personal letter written by Dr Strain to a former moderator of this website... (and which you'd find in the sticky thread at the top of the genetics forum)

I found it when I did a google for "Breeding White Boxers" on **********************************, assumed it was correctly cited, my bad!

[Bridget D]

With what I know about genetics in general, I am of the opinion that white Boxers should not be bred for the overall health of the breed and I truly believe that any responsible breeder would not breed a white Boxer.

It just shows me that the woman who is using her white male for stud is either undeducated, (irresponsible), in breeding overall or just callously out to make a buck.

It upsets me as well when people buy pure bred dogs (of any breed), with the intent of breeding them to make a buck.

I think that there should be a law that requires anyone who breeds a dog in the U.S. to pay a "Registered Breeders Fee", and have standards that must be met, and anyone who breeds without being registered should be heavily fined.

If these backyard breeders and puppy mills had to pay $1000 or more upfront each year to maintain the status of a registered breeder we'd have a lot less problems and much healthier breeds.

The root of the problem is money, instead of allowing them to make money to breed their pets, make it cost them money.

[Caney Creek]

Originally Posted by Bridget D

With what I know about genetics in general, I am of the opinion that white Boxers should not be bred for the overall health of the breed and I truly believe that any responsible breeder would not breed a white Boxer.

It just shows me that the woman who is using her white male for stud is either undeducated, (irresponsible), in breeding overall or just callously out to make a buck.

It upsets me as well when people buy pure bred dogs (of any breed), with the intent of breeding them to make a buck.

I think that there should be a law that requires anyone who breeds a dog in the U.S. to pay a "Registered Breeders Fee", and have standards that must be met, and anyone who breeds without being registered should be heavily fined.

If these backyard breeders and puppy mills had to pay $1000 or more upfront each year to maintain the status of a registered breeder we'd have a lot less problems and much healthier breeds.

The root of the problem is money, instead of allowing them to make money to breed their pets, make it cost them money.

In my opinion, I don't think that litters from a white sire or dam should be allowed to register with the Kennel Clubs. Unfortunately it seems (to me) that this has become a problem since whites have been allowed to register, since obviously when they could NOT register then their offspring could not be registered as well. Of course that wouldn't stop the problem of backyard breeding, but it might give us a little more confidence in the pedigree of a KC registered dog.... just my thoughts.