My new puppy!

Slippertalk Orchid Forum

Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:

Sirius

Plant Nerd
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
476
Reaction score
0
You once again make some good points - by 3-4 weeks of age a breeder could easily detect a deaf puppy, it would probably take another 1-2 weeks to notice a blind or partially blind puppy.

Why are you bringing blindness into the equation? White Boxers are no more inclined to blindness than their brindle siblings. This discussion is about deafness, which aside from ability to sunburn, is the only health issue white Boxers encounter more than their brown siblings.

Most puppies are fully weaned & ready to go to their new homes at 7 weeks of age. At this stage of the game, how would you or anyone else know if this animal has/ or will have a compromised immune system? These are all things mentioned in the links you provided, that can be associated with white Boxers.

I think you need to re-read the links I posted. Not once is it mentioned that white Boxers have compromised immune systems. You are perpetuating myths that white dogs are somehow less healthy than their colored counterparts. I suggest you read this essay... http://www.newcastleboxers.com/white.shtml

I think you might find the last paragraph interesting

"An independent Boxer Health Survey by Hawkleigh Boxers reveals that the only health problems that are "significantly" (my term - at least 1% more incidence) more frequent in white Boxers are deafness and sunburn. In fact, white Boxers are "significantly" less affected by skin tumors, gastrointestinal disorders, and spinal/skeletal problems. Granted, this is an unscientific survey based on anecdotal evidence - but it seems to at least indicate a need for further study."

While it is not definitive proof that whites are any healthier than colored Boxers, it sure does counter the myth that whites are more prone to health problems than colored Boxers.

Yes, SOME will be fine. Will you be the lucky one to recieve that dog?

I am not sure how to respond to this. I think it's a big crapshoot buying any pet, especially "pure"bred dogs (what a joke that term is). I don't want to go into all of the genetic diseases that can affect all Boxer puppies like hip dysplasia and heart murmurs. That would lead to a huge discussion about all dog breeds, including Golden Retrievers, and frankly I want to stick to the discussion of white Boxers. My main point has still gone unanswered. You seem to support that white Boxer puppies should be culled at birth because they stand a 1 in 5 chance of being born deaf.

I recently read an article which quoted a Boxer breeder as saying that he culled white puppies because he couldn't stand the idea of someone breeding a white boxer. This argument is so monumentally retarded. Two brown boxers bred together will produce 25% white puppies. SO, to minimize the chance of more white puppies being born, you kill them. Then breed more brown boxers, which produce more white puppies, which you kill. How is this reducing the number of white puppies born? Wouldn't it be better to spay/neuter the white puppies instead, preventing them from being bred but still providing great family pets? That is exactly what some breeders are doing.

I will leave you with this thought GoldenRose, because obviously neither one of us is any less passionate about our own ideas, and we could go on debating each other enlessly in this thread while other forum members ignore us. :)

White Bulldogs are allowed by the AKC to be shown in competition. White Bulldog puppies are prone to being born deaf, because they have the same gene that Boxers carry. The Bulldog is the ancestor of the Boxer for crimeny sake! Here is a link to the Bulldog standard... http://www.akc.org/breeds/bulldog/index.cfm

Now, here is a link to the Boxer standard... http://www.akc.org/breeds/boxer/index.cfm White Boxers are not allowed for showing. One in five white Boxers are born deaf, and yet many white puppies are killed at birth that will grow up to be healthy, hearing and happy dogs for some family. You can't deny this.

Why is there a difference in the breed standard for Bulldogs, and the breed standard for Boxers? Because a long time ago, some jackass decided that it should be so. I would hope that eventually, this will change.

The AKC, by setting breed standards that aren't based in reality, promotes the killing of healthy puppies. No emotion is involved in this statement. I am not some PETA whacko with an agenda. I am merely letting everyone see it with their own eyes. Why did two members post that they had never seen a white Boxer before? Because there simply aren't as many of them around, as there are colored boxers. Yet.
 

cnycharles

Peloric keiki
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
9,872
Reaction score
261
Location
elmer, nj
all other points aside, I would think that if a breeder were to wait until they could tell if the puppy were deaf, spay/neuter them at the appropriate time and then offer them to families then that would be fine. if as it is stated that these white dogs aren't albinos and they are offspring of other white dogs then from the info it doesn't seem like they are any more unfortunately likely to have a bunch more health problems than many other acceptable breeds. if the pups are released as 'non-propagating' pets like many animals that go through rescue programs, they can't further the possible genes to make more animals that could really have many health problems.
 

Sirius

Plant Nerd
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
476
Reaction score
0
Exactly Charles! And this is starting to happen, but it is very slow in process.

I couldn't care less about showing dogs. But it just seems that the breed standards that dictate showing dogs is causing the acceptance of white Boxers to happen more slowly than it should. After all, white Bulldogs are born deaf every day, yet you can show a white Bulldog in the ring while white Boxers are still being killed at birth. Something is rotten in Denmark with this kind of spotty logic.
 

cnycharles

Peloric keiki
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
9,872
Reaction score
261
Location
elmer, nj
i used to own a red/white border collie until he was pts because of cancer. many border collie owners especially those who used them for herding were adamant that the akc not have them be an 'accepted' breed to be included in their registry, because they had concerns that bc's don't have a 'standard' look and they were bred to have a behavior pattern (herding instinct), and that an akc breed standard would be bad for the breed. i also had peripheral contact with bc breed rescue and know that many bc's had health problems like many other breeds because of those who bred them for looks, especially different colors like red/white, red merle and blue merle. one of the problems my dog had that was documented for color breeding was retinal decay though that's not the proper term for it.
dog standards have no rhyme or reason, and like with orchids the striving for 'perfection' of some stated standard usually ends up with things not ending up well for either one a good percentage of the time. it is a shame that mostly healthy animals are killed, but then it is just as bad that there so many people who are breeding for things that should be avoided in the first place or the whole process should be thought about a lot more beforehand. there are so many animals already, that more breeding really doesn't need to be done unless it is to try and rescue a breed that has had lots of things happen to it, like changing conformation standards for german shepherds
 
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
488
Reaction score
0
Location
Los Angeles, California
My family breeds and shows Rhodesian Ridgebacks, who like most other pure bred dogs have congenital problems. All of our dogs are x-rayed prior to being bred for hip, elbow, and shoulder problems. Our dogs however, are still pron to issues, namely dermoid cysts and being ridgeless. We don't cull dogs. Ridgeless dogs, like most white dogs, have a cosmetic defect, other then that they are good sound dogs. One puppy in our last litter was born with a small dermoid cyst, it had a small surgery and was sent off to a great home to lead a normal healthy life. All of our dogs are non-showing dogs sent our with spay/neuter contracts, and we require all owners to send us copies of the vet bill proving that the procedure was indeed carried out. Some breeders cull ridgeless dogs and dogs with dermoids (no matter how small). I personally think that the practice is barbaric. If we culled every "pet-quality" dog in a litter we would only wind up with 2 or 3 out of 9 to 12, and a lot of great people would miss out on having a great companion. Our pet quality dogs can still lure course, can still herd, can still do obediance, can still be the best friend you've ever had. The bottom line is, responsible breeders keep issues to an absolute minimum in the first place, period. That brings me to the following quote:

Oprah recently did a story on puppy mills and how the dogs they raise are often abused. From what I have read, many so called "Professional" breeders aren't much better. I purchased Sirius from a private dog owner who is raising the puppies inside her home with her family. This type of "back yard breeding" is also looked down upon by professional dog breeders, but at least they don't kill the white puppies.

I don't know how you are defining "professional breeder", but I can tell you that I know just about every person that shows Rhodesian Ridgebacks in California, as well as the top breeders nationwide, and we all raise our dogs in our homes and our puppies underfoot. We sleep with the litter so no puppy is rolled over and would most definitely take offense to being called either a "backyard breeder" or a"professional breeder". Backyard breeders don't screen their dogs for problems prior to breeding and don't keep careful documentation of their lineages. Reputable breeders aren't doing it for profit, we do it because we love the breed and our dogs. Trust me between vet bills, vaccinations, missed days of work and sleepless nights we hardly break even.
 

Sirius

Plant Nerd
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
476
Reaction score
0
I don't know how you are defining "professional breeder", but I can tell you that I know just about every person that shows Rhodesian Ridgebacks in California, as well as the top breeders nationwide, and we all raise our dogs in our homes and our puppies underfoot. We sleep with the litter so no puppy is rolled over and would most definitely take offense to being called either a "backyard breeder" or a"professional breeder". Backyard breeders don't screen their dogs for problems prior to breeding and don't keep careful documentation of their lineages. Reputable breeders aren't doing it for profit, we do it because we love the breed and our dogs. Trust me between vet bills, vaccinations, missed days of work and sleepless nights we hardly break even.

Well, the terms I have chosen to use are thrown about without any real definition by every dog group on the web. I am sorry if you took offense to my usage of them, but honestly, these are the terms used by breeders online. Here are my interpretations...

Professional (or experienced, if you wish) breeder: A person who raises one breed of dog with the intention of continuing champion bloodline show dogs. They probably test their animals before breeding them, and participate in culling puppies that they consider outside the breed standard regardless of physical condition. They may have a kennel built to house the numbers of breeding dogs they may have at any given time. The dogs are not raised in puppy mill conditions, but they aren't raised in the home either. Conformation is king, all else is a waste of time.

Amateur, or "Backyard" breeder: A person who breeds whatever registered dog they can get their hands on. They often do not own both parents of the litter, and do not perform any health testing of the animals prior to breeding. They often try to sell the puppies at a premium, before panicking when they don't sell and end up giving some of the puppies away. The worst case scenario in action.

You can obviously understand my confusion with these terms when they are used quite often to describe many different types of breeders. In between the worst case scenario and the champion bloodline breeder are all the gray area folks.

We can discuss all the semantics and terms we want. What it all boils down to is this: healthy Boxer puppies, and the occasional deaf but otherwise healthy Boxer puppy are destroyed by breeders who claim they are doing it for the right reasons. There are no right reasons to destroy healthy animals. That's the point I wanted to make, and I think I made it somewhere in between all the other discussion. I will post some more cute pics soon, since that was the original reason for the thread.
 
G

goldenrose

Guest
Why are you bringing blindness into the equation? White Boxers are no more inclined to blindness than their brindle siblings. This discussion is about deafness, which aside from ability to sunburn, is the only health issue white Boxers encounter more than their brown siblings.

The boxer buddies link, under 10 Quick White Boxer FAQ's, #5 states that some can be both & #6 brings up the subject of cancer. I used the term compromised immune system (to try to keep the post shorter) because if one's body is working correctly, one should not get any disease.


I think you need to re-read the links I posted. Not once is it mentioned that white Boxers have compromised immune systems. You are perpetuating myths that white dogs are somehow less healthy than their colored counterparts. I suggest you read this essay... http://www.newcastleboxers.com/white.shtml

Perpetuating myths??? After working for a vet for 8 yrs. & seeing these "rare & unusual" color types in many breeds come thru the door with health issues, I think not. Many did not have life threatening problems but chronic problems can be very costly to the pet owner.



I think it's a big crapshoot buying any pet, especially "pure"bred dogs (what a joke that term is).
I agree with you 100%!

How is this reducing the number of white puppies born? Wouldn't it be better to spay/neuter the white puppies instead, preventing them from being bred but still providing great family pets? That is exactly what some breeders are doing.

John, we agree to disagree but there are quite a few points I agree with you wholeheartedly. Will culling the white puppies of colored parents reduce the # of white puppies being born? Absolutely not! Yes they are wonderful dogs for pet homes. Will there be individuals who purposely bred more white boxers, to get more 'rare' white boxers to sell & make $$$? You betcha! Here's where the problem lies & deeper troubles begin.

Don't be so quick to come down on the AKC, can we find some good that they've done? In the boxer buddies link it states "the American Boxer Club set the standard" (yet the AKC was blamed). Does AKC want to accept this standard for this breed to become AKC recognized? That's how it starts, the national bred club offers the standard. Will it change along the line - more than likely. You will always have split fanciers, the ones that have the biggest mouth usually win initially.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DukeBoxer

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
294
Reaction score
0
John, nice dog! I have one, as you can see in my avatar. He's almost 4 years old. You're in for a ride for sure! I brought mine up in Costa Rica at a mountain hotel that we worked at. He was allowed to run free all day long, there was more than enough room there for him, and the tourists loved him. I wanted a white one but the litter was all colored. One thing I read about white boxers is this. One of the first "Boxers" from the bullenbieser cross was actually white, it was a female, I forget the name. Anyway, right away from the creation of the breed there were always white ones, but at one point the German police started using them as police dogs, and the white one were more visible at night, which made them less desirable, and that is when they started breeding away from the whites, or discouraging them.

Thats something I read somewhere, if it's true or not, I'm not sure, but it sounds like it could be believable. Take care, good luck and be prepared for a lot of laughs, they are real characters!!!
 

Latest posts

Top