A couple months ago I used BreedMate Pedigree Explorer to create a database of Border Terrier bloodlines. This would allow me to easily run Coefficient of Inbreeding (COI) calculations and do hypothetical matings, thus improving my breeding decisions. In the process I ended up tracing Wally and Ava’s bloodlines all the way back to the 1890s.
First of all, wow, the development of the breed saw so much inbreeding and Popular Sire Syndrome. I saw many dogs over and over and over again. Back in the day there were only so many BTs and apparently they all knew each other on a conjugal level. This is common during breed development though, so I wasn’t surprised. It was just fascinating to see genetic concepts actually played out in history.
Secondly, did you know that dogs in the UK rarely have CH titles? As I was looking through the UK pedigrees very few of the dogs had a CH title. To earn a UK CH the dog has to earn three Challenge Certificates (CCs), which is difficult to achieve. A CC all by itself is meaningful and many pedigrees will note if a dog has earned one, even if they never finished. I’ve seen something similar with certain breeds in America, like the Doberman, who face enormous entries and as a result getting points at all is a big deal.
Things have changed over 100+ years but this got me thinking about whether or not CH titles should be as meaningful as we’ve been told they are. For years the refrain has been that “a good breeder puts CH titles on their breeding stock” because “a CH title is a sign of quality.” Sure, it’s a sign of quality but you still have to evaluate the actual dog with your eyeballs. So why are there so many CH-titled breeding dogs in the US and so few in the UK? You could argue that US dogs are higher quality but it’s more likely that an American CH is easier to obtain, for whatever reason.
I don’t always chew, but when I do I prefer bully sticks. I’m the most interesting dog in the world.
I probably wouldn’t have questioned this so much if Ava liked showing, but she doesn’t. As a breeder it was important that I finish her, but as an owner it was critical that I respect her needs. I was advised to “make her to do it anyways” and that “she’ll get used to it”. I disagreed. It was more likely she would no longer trust me to protect her, not to mention she would hate it. I’d have created a lifelong rift so I could earn two tiny letters and a piece of paper.
The better, yet far more time consuming, option was to systematically counter condition and desensitize her to the whole experience, then use +R to train the operant behaviors required for showing. I was pursuing this option until one day I found myself watching Ava goof off, and I finally asked myself, is it worth it to train my dog to do something she hates in order to be a “good” breeder?
The obvious answer is no. It is one thing to ask your dog to do an activity she feels “meh” about, yet it’s quite another to pursue a sport that makes her miserable. This is a common topic amongst agility folks and it should be more common in the conformation world. The quality of my dog isn’t determined by the titles she carries. If I don’t respect her needs and quality of life then I’m not a good breeder, period.
Instead of conformation we’ll do agility, which is a sport Ava adores. Maybe we’ll never trial; maybe she’ll never have any titles, who knows? Either way it’ll be fun to play together.