Building a breed from scratch

[glenninindy]

There's a site aiming to build a large companion dog with the bone structure (not to scale) of an extinct dire wolf. Is it silly? Oh yeah. But I'm trying to place this on the continuum between BYB and top breeders.

Lurking for a few days, health testing, pedigrees, and having a goal are some of the qualities to look for in a breeder. They're building their own spec for a breed that doesn't exist, which seems like a whole lot of BS, but they have a long list of specific traits for body sizes and shapes, behavior, even the sound, so it's not them giving themselves carte blanche either. That's why I wanted to ask this sub. They DNA tested what looks like >50 dogs. They have a bit of a pedigree thing started in terms of publicly disclosing which dogs begat which other dogs, but not in the sense of those ancestors being exceptional exemplars of the breed, obviously.

I guess when this effort started in the late 80's they were calling it a Shepalute which is significantly less memey.

I'm a 0-time dog owner. Please don't urge me not to buy dogs wrong. I won't.

So is this good or bad? How are new breeds recognized officially? What's missing? Is it a matter of time so the breed identity is much more uniform as they get closer to their stated goals?

There's a horizon-spanning red flag where the site says they want to breed by God's Plan™. It's not leaving things to chance (maximum BYB), they're kind of just doing a really poor job of explaining that by breeding dogs more fit for modern families their dogs' "fitness" improves. Since survival of the fittest in the more savage sense is no longer a major factor (though longevity is a breed goal), the dogs are more "fit" if they can live happily as companion dogs that make their families happy. So by bungling both an evolutionary and a religious metaphor at the same time as a giant, unholy, mixed metaphor, they're just trying to say the breed's specific listed goals are meant to suit this larger goal of making a breed people will want.

 

[lenam331]

@glenninindy I followed this breeder for quite awhile because I liked the look of some of the dogs and I was hoping for a healthier alternative to German Shepherds.

I don't even know where to begin with what a shitshow I witnessed. She doesn't do any basic health checks you'd expect (hips, eyes, cardiac), and she's crossing breeds that have significant health issues (Mastiff, GSD). She doesn't check hips, as she "doesn't trust vets." Her breeding dogs have terrible structure (swayback, weak pasterns, etc), and she has bred dogs that were returned to her for being aggressive towards people. She breeds bitches over and over without giving them breaks, and she breeds underage bitches as well as underage dogs. She's done several mother/son pairings, including pairing a bitch with her son that was 8 months old.

She bred a litter where the puppies had underdeveloped kidneys, and several of the puppies had to be euthanized. She kept a male from that litter and bred him.

She breeds purely for the "look," with no regards to health. Her health check is that the dog in question "runs and jumps with no limping." She does minimal vetting on her dogs. The puppies are normally born in dirt dens the momma dogs dig in their runs.

I don't know if this project is still active, but a few years back she started a new project to create "foxes." What breed did she begin with? Her mastiff crosses

They also have a super sketchy "service dog/direwolf" program I've seen pop up in the service dog community

 

[glenninindy]

@lenam331 Jeeeeesus.

 

[amyser]

@lenam331 What’s the breeder called?

 

[lenam331]

@amyser Lois Schwartz

 

[silverthorne]

@glenninindy The issue with single kennel breeds is that there is no overall organization to steer the breed in a good direction.

In a new breed situation the breed club should decide what the goal is for the breed and then access each dog produced to that standard. Each dog produced needs to have complete health testing done. The dogs also need to be tested for temperment and drive, will they do the things you need them to do?

Then after all the dogs produced are tested the club decided which puppies go on to breed together to try and make a better generation that is closer to the breed standard.

All in all, single kennel breeds fail nearly 100% of the time, because you either have to have high enough volume of dogs to have the genetic diversity to have a sustainable population or you have your handful of breeding dogs that produce 1 generation after another with 0 breed improvement.

 

[davecb]

@silverthorne

All in all, single kennel breeds fail nearly 100% of the time,

In ye olden days, some(very few) people could do it because they had lots of money, paid help, land and friends who would take dogs.

The Golden Retriever was basically invented by one guy, Dudley Marjoribanks, (AKA Lord Tweedmouth). He kept meticulous records. I can trace every Golden I've owned back to this dog because he was such a good record keeper.

He bred Nous to a bunch of dogs, some retrievers and Spaniels, and kept records and more records. He gave puppies to friends and bred to some of those dogs, maybe the earlier example of a guardian home.

Nous was born in 1864. The first yellow retrievers were shown as Wavy or Flat Coated” in 1906. The breed was officially recognized in England in 1911. Think about that span of time!! I can't see anyone today having that sort of stamina.

Anyway, I don't think anyone could do what Tweedmouth did, today. It would need someone with so much money, connections, space, time, and, the ability to toss out an entire program, start over, and go on. He didn't need to sell puppies, ask for donations, he could just fund it all on his own.

 

[silverthorne]

@davecb Griffons are the same way, One dude started with dogs and bred them true, but he had some rich patrons who sent him money and he got rid of dogs that didn't fit his program.

 

[davecb]

@silverthorne

One dude started with dogs and bred them true, but he had some rich patrons who sent him money and he got rid of dogs that didn't fit his program.

And that's what it takes. Instead of spending money on stuff like this they spend it on dogs. But those people are rare!!

 

[dukedesu]

@davecb I wish I had the kind of money and resources where I could keep a large kennel of dogs happy! It would make breeding and moving forward so much easier.

 

[davecb]

@dukedesu

I wish I had the kind of money and resources where I could keep a large kennel of dogs happy! It would make breeding and moving forward so much easier.

The person who taught the first handling classes I went to, was the son of Lee Canalizo who did that with Afghans and I believe (but you probably would know better), Salukis.

I had no idea at the time how big they were in dogs!! I just thought they were nice with my puppy. Lee used to sometimes show up to help teach with Michael.

 

[dukedesu]

@davecb How lucky to have a handling class taught by legends in the sport! They were definitely predominately afghan hounds, but they have had a few Salukis. I always enjoy showing to Michael, but never had the chance to show to Lee unfortunately! She liked my late special, but was no longer judging at the time.

 

[davecb]

@dukedesu

I always enjoy showing to Michael, but never had the chance to show to Lee unfortunately!

She was wonderful with puppies. When I started with them, I had no idea who they were lol. They were literally around the corner from my house, and my puppy and I could walk there.

 

[davecb]

@glenninindy

So is this good or bad?

They're selling this bitch.

She whelped a litter before she was a year old. That's abusive, let alone ridiculous.

 

[gideondavid40]

@glenninindy I was curious when I saw this so I took a deep dive into this and while the inital principles and dogs looked promising, it now looks like a hot mess. Unfortunately breed creation requires alot of people, and I mean alot, from various different walks of life.

Whilst I admire what they initially set out to do its clear they've had shifting priorities and directions of the dogs in the last few years. I mean the kennels are now spilt in 2, and are aspiring to 2 different breeds. Their original goal was to register the American Alsatian and now that's spilt off into two breeds with the American Dirus and they haven't even achieved breed consistency yet and they're already splitting off? That and they no longer care about registering the American Alsation either citing that they don't agree with what they'd have to do to be registered.

Now while I do agree that breed registers like the AKC can be archaic and not always for the best of the breed, there are plenty of other breed registers they could aspire to gain registration in.

This is where I think it all goes down hill for them. They seem very set in how they know better than all the breed registers, veterinarians and other breeders, they they'll follow 'gods plan' with breeding and create 'strongbred' dogs not purebred. You don't reinvent the wheel to create a new model of car do you? So why do that with a dog breed.

They're effectively disregarding any information that doesnt align with what they want. When your creating a line of dogs, just a well bred line alone, you need input of lots of people and you will already (hopefully) be breeding off the back of an already well proven and established line or lines, so the ground work is already half laid. Without the input of others on your line aka mentors, vets, people with specific knowledge on your breed like conformation judges or even other kennel owners of the same breed, you have the massive risk of being very one minded and short sighted or what we call kennel blind.

These people making these dogs have none of this, no third party with any kind of breed knowledge is looking at these dogs and pointing out the flaws and successes, only they are, and it's very damaging. No matter how good you are or how excellent your knowledge of breeding is you need outside input to your dogs as you will not always see the bigger picture because your so close to it. It is so easy for even an amazing breeder to become kennel blind if you're not careful, and unfortunately that's exactly what's happening here but taking it a step bigger and it's breed blind now.

A few of the other major red flags include;

• One of the biggest red flags I see is they breed dogs that haven't even fully developed, on what appears to be their first heat. Ignoring the health issues that can cause to a bitch and pups, why would you breed a dog before it's fully developed and you can actually see all the traits physical and mental that it has? How do you even know that dog will align with your breeding goals? You don't.
  The only time I've seen breedings like this being needed to be done is to save already proven, nearly extinct breeds or lines, and even then it's done with severe caution. It's absolutely not needed here.
• The lack of almost any health testing and relying on 'god' to take out the weak puppies. I see they log some health issues and remove them from the gene pool which is a good start. But they seem to judge the dogs breeding potential alot solely by visual inspection which is not ideal. They've even admitted on their site that this method is flawed. Today we have many new methods with modern vet medicine to help determine a dogs breeding potential they choose none? Why?
• They have bred some dogs with health issues that should not have ever been bred if you take a deeper look into their site you can see this. Why would they do this, the only logic I can assume is to maintain a specific look they want, which is funny since they called out purebred dog breeders for doing this and said it ruins breeds. Breeding for a specific look while ignoring health issues is just backyard breeding at it's core.
• One other major issue here I see is the lack of cohesive direction. Like I said earlier they've split off into 2 breeds now, which is a red flag for lack of cohesive vision for their breed. But also now the main founder has another project of creating fox like dogs. Continuing an excellent line and improving it can take one's whole life, let alone to create one breed in a lifetime. To try to create 2 completely different well bred, breeds in a lifetime is impossible without a ton of help which this breeder doesn't have. Plus the amount of breeds they're pouring into that fox dog breed is insane, how will they achieve any consistency when you have that many breeds so early on? It's just red flag city.

On a final note I read one of the most recent blog posts and they're struggling to find homes for the latest pups and yet have more litters planned. It just doesn't bode well.

Creating a new breed is absoultely possible but it takes many, many people with a shared vision and goal to do so, and alot of money. Solo breeders or even duos will struggle to achieve this, the amount of dogs needed, vet costs and professional expertise is a whole project that you need serious investment from people in. I think the project started out admirable for sure, but it's just missing the mark, it's why you need the help of many others.

EDIT ~~~

Add on
I looked at the pedigrees more recently of the Kingsley Kennels and oh my lord there is zero consistency in these dogs, they look like street dogs and they're selling them for $1800 a hit Jesus please please avoid, these people have no clue about breeding. They won't be able to promise you anything with your dog as their dogs are incredibly inconsistent.

After looking at their story and pedigrees more I just don't get what they're doing? They had consistency in 2002 with their dogs and then added more breeds which made them inconsistent, then in 2006 started to get more consistency and then added more breeds and then in 2010 more consistency and added more breeds yet again and then in 2022 still adding in more unique dogs to the pedigrees why??? This breed has been in formation since the 80s how on earth can they not even present any consistency in any litters? That's 40 years to deliver consistency, other breeds were made in far less time. It's insane.

Steer clear.

 

[lenam331]

@gideondavid40 What blog are you referring to? They go by so many names I'm not finding it. It's been awhile since I've read up on them and it seems that some of the names aren't used anymore

 

[gideondavid40]

@lenam331 Their website is a mess to navigate but this was the blog post I was referring to. https://direwolfproject.com/blog/strongbred-breeding/why-do-we-have-leftover-puppies/

They're trying to justify why they have leftover dogs and some of the reasons are fair for sure, like inflation etc. But the whole thing is their dogs are overpriced for dogs that they literally can promise nothing from. They can't promise the look of the dog, the temperament or the size. For that price you'd want some solid guarantees that the dog your buying is what you want.

Also not that I agree with them breeding for looks, but they said the reason this litter didn't sell well was because of the colors and temperament of the bitch. They obviously knew this was a possibility before especially the temperament, why go ahead with the breeding then? I don't know the decisions just seem odd.

And overall even if I was wrong about it all, they should not have more breedings/litters planned for this year if they know they'll struggle to find homes for them, any good breeder knows this and would stop for the year.

It's just a

 

[glenninindy]

@gideondavid40 They reference an old founder who was probably "legit but too small on her own". Yeah.

Have you heard of a new breed happening in the last two or three decades?

 

[gideondavid40]

@glenninindy Unfortunately the reality of creating a new breed is lots of time, money and people who want to help. Without that most are doomed to fail eventually even if it's just to not having enough dogs out there that the dogs die out as quickly as they were created.

I haven't honestly seen any new breeds being created that have been successful in recent times. One could argue doodles but it's a massively disorganized breed with no cohesion and fraught with backyard breeders and hung pedigrees. I have seen in recent times some breeders geninuely trying to create cohesion and monitoring bodies but I fear the damage is done with doodle type dogs now, too many people who won't follow the rules or a shared vision for a breed. It's sad really because they could have been something very interesting.

What I have seen though is 2 things. One is breeders trying to help their chosen breed to go back to what it used to be. Unfortunately having bodies like the AKC have postives like breed cohesion and testing and so on, but also negatives that in recent years have become glaringly obvious. Standards of breeds have become less about the wellbeing of the dogs and ability to fufil their breeds purpose, and more about the look of them which never ever ends in a good place. Judges from AKC conformation and the like are especially responsible for the last 80 or so years of this, you only have to look up a handful of dogs to see what's been done to them. Look at Bull Terriers, Rottweilers, German Shepherds, Great Danes, French Bulldogs and of course the most notable the Pug. Looking at early 1900s photos of these dogs shows exactly what's happened and it's tragic, the over excentuated traits are glaringly obvious in a lot of lines.

Anyway more on topic I've seen good breeders in recent years look at what their breed has become and began to try and solve the problems of their breed by adding in new breeds with the eventual plan to have cohesion across the breed and a healthier animal. One of the ones I look at with most interest is retro pugs. I think they're doing excellent work and they're overseeing it with a proper body. (https://retropugclub.com/) It's early days but I am happy to see where this goes, breaks my heart to see pugs where they are now. Alot of breeders are starting projects like this and I think its admirable and hope to see more of it. Not a new breed I suppose but I think it's similar a vein.

Another interesting thing is that if you look at the AKC breed register you'll notice that many breeds were only registered in the last 5-15 years and you'd think a new breed was created. But if you look it's actually breeds that have been around for a very long time often 70-80 years but just weren't registered. There's also heaps of breeds that aren't registered with AKC thar are genetically distinct and have been for a very long time, but the breed club either don't want to go through the long and expensive process or the AKC won't recognize them because of a variation of reasons. Some of the dogs are registered with other dog registers like the UKC (which can honestly be a bit of a joke), the ADBA and even their own specific breed register, or country's register.

As a final thing I think the lack of new breed creation is probably down to the fact we don't need dogs for as many jobs as we once did, and most jobs that do call for dogs, can be filled by breeds that already exist. So why create another and go through that whole process?

On creating a breed the most important reason is why? What purpose? And I think most people realize when they ask it that there's other dogs that can do what they need that already exist. That said I'll be interested to see what breeds do come in the next few years, I think alot will be split offs of already existing breeds that are healthier.

Another thing I would encourage people who want to create a breed should do instead is save one. There are a number of breeds nearing extinction and maybe some are natrual extinction but it would be very admirable to try to save them as they're a piece of human history. Breeds like the Smooth Collie, Glen of Immal, Kerry Blue, English Setter, English Toy Terrier and a ton more. They all need people to help keep them alive. Some have fewer than 300 dogs left.

That's my 2 cents anyway.

 

[glenninindy]

Thanks everyone for the replies. I figured this would at least be a departure from same old same old. Really interesting thoughts and it's helping me understand a bit about how a breeder who does a few right things might present themselves. I figure I can suss out a lot of cash grabbers, but this lot is losing money to uphold principles (that are not entirely correct) trying hard and just not doing it right (or ethically Right).