If you like a certain group of dog breeds, is there an ethical or moral obligation to?

Question

help keep the lesser know breeds in that group going? For example, I like the terriers. So when choosing a puppy, should the relative popularity of the breeds within the group sway my decision at all? Do we have an obligation to keep all the breeds alive? Or should breeds be allowed to die out?

2006 Litter stats from the AKC web site:

Miniature Schnauzers - 12,645

Fox Terriers (Wire) - 564

Welsh Terriers - 371

Border Terriers - 304

Irish Terriers - 98

Lakeland Terriers - 98

Skye Terriers - 28

Sealyham Terriers - 15

Glen of Imaal Terriers - 10

Answer 1

I don't feel any obligation to keep other breeds going.  Really there are hundreds of less popular breeds, I couldn't possibly have the resources to worry about ALL the scenthounds that are low in numbers.

I have made a commitment to the Basset Hound, to do the best I can for the breed.  I also have a responsibility for the welfare of dogs in general, but propping up less popular breeds is for the fanciers of those breeds.

Answer 2

No. Personally, I feel no ethical or moral obligation to the other members of the AKC herding group. Dog breeds are all different, regardless of what group they have been placed. German Shepherd Dogs have nothing in common with Australian Shepherds or Bearded Collies or even Canaan Dogs, besides their original purpose.

I will leave the other members of the herding group to the breeders and owners of that breed who know that breed inside and out. It is not my responsibility to ensure the overall health and genetic diversity in all members of a certain group. My responsibilities lie specifically with the German Shepherd Dog. GSDs are my breed and I will do anything for them just as a person that has dedicated their life to Miniature Schnauzers would do anything for their breed.

I shouldn't have to worry about other breeds going extinct. Every breed has their followers and their breeders and their owners etc. I am certain that they can care for and watch over their own breed better than I ever could.

Do we have an obligation to keep every breed from going extinct? Sure, you could say that, but I think there is nothing wrong with focusing my attention on one breed while allowing someone else to take care of another. As a whole, yes I believe we do have an obligation to every dog breed in every group, but as one individual I believe my efforts and services are better applied if I focus on one specific breed.

Relative popularity of a breed within a group should in no way sway a person's decision. A person should choose a breed that suits them. They should not choose a breed based on popularity alone. If they did that, I believe they would do more harm than good.

ADD: I also thought I might mention the fact that I have owned and met dogs from multiple AKC groups. I love diversity and have many dog breeds that I am fond of. Many are in the Sporting group. Others are in the Working group and still others in the Herding group. I would find it very hard to be dedicated to an entire group simply because I am fond of breeds in multiple groups and am not fond of other individual breeds in those specific groups.

Answer 3

no you have to go with the one you like so you bond well with it. and just because these are all that are registered doesn't mean the breed is in trouble. most people who sell privately don't register the puppies so that the new owner cant start breeding and put them out of business

Answer 4

I believe you're going to live with the dog of your choosing for a lot of years so you've got to get the dog you love.  Popularity shouldn't sway anyone's decision in the slightest.  There's always going to be a dog for everyone and someone is going to fall in love with the least popular breed in every group.

Besides that, I've been around long enough to know how the popularity of breeds changes.  They're in constant flux - what's hugely popular today, isn't going to be 15 years from now, it's going to be a breed that's relatively unpopular today.

Answer 5

Individual breed characteristics can vary greatly, even if classified in the same group.

So no, I do not feel an obligation to do that.  I have chosen my breed for a reason.

Answer 6

No, I feel no ethical or moral obligation to the other members in the working group... although I will say I do feel more of a need to assist the northern breeds when it comes to working with rescue or training idiots how to train/live with their dogs.

FWIW- While I dislike the notion of Samoyeds being anywhere near the same group as the Am. Eskimos and Poms I do see a tremendous advantage for all the so-called Nordic/spitz breeds to be out of the groups they are in where they are often overlooked.

Answer 7

My favourite breed is the malinois..it has been for 30 years. I know many individuals in that breed that do not deserve that name though.

No, no breed should have to die out, it is individual dogs within the breed that may need to though!

I believe that all breeds and all dogs included in those breeds have an obligation to perform according to the breed standard...all of them, no exceptions!

The ones that do not should not be pawned off as pets, as we discussed yesterday, they should be culled for the betterment of the breed.

Does that make sense? Hope I helped!

Answer 8

I *think* I know what you're asking.

I don't feel responsible for the other dogs in the Working Group....if that is what you're asking. I leave that up to the breeders/fanciers of those breeds.

Group classifications are decided upon by the kennel club. For example, the Herding/Working groups used to be a single (Working) group. Now, the AKC is considering new groupings of dogs, some by type -- the Siberian would be put into a "Nordic" or "Spitz" group, along with the Pom and the American Eskimo (WTF?).

I feel no loyalty to the other breeds in the group, although I may appreciate/enjoy seeing them.

ADD: Okay, maybe I thought you were asking something else. LOL!

I like the Hounds. For my next hound, should I choose the PBGV because there are so few of them, or the Rhodesian Ridgeback because I love the breed, want to lure course, and would like a short-haired dog (for once)?

I think the answer is pretty easy! You go with the breed that fits your lifestyle/wants, as the others have said. :) Not out of any need to preserve dogs in the group that you have no desire to live with.

Love your new avatar!

Answer 9

I would say no. I wouldn't choose a dog that is low on numbers are considered a rare breed to preserve it. Many of these breeds won't fit my lifestyle even if they are in the working group.

Like the Black Russian Terrier, lovely dog but not a dog for me, same goes for the Malamute, which is increasing in numbers slowly, again not a breed for me.

I would do as much as i could to save the Bernese if they went through a state of decline. They are a lovely breed which have a steady birth rate in the UK.

One thing which i have noticed is the amount of bad breeding of the Bernese in the US. I saw one in a pet store a few years ago, boy i was horrified. I see photos of peoples Bernese on facebook and i look at their dogs and think what bad breeding as many don't even look like Bernese from the shape of them, only the markings say its a Bernese.

Answer 10

I am not sure if I would feel responsible to the other herding breeds because I have a Collie.

I would like to know how you got those stats?  I would like to see how the Collie is faring in this day and age...I know they used to be very popular but now you rarely see any.