Update:2001The GSMDCA has finally implemented a new set of Breeder Guidelines however, they continue to generate controversy within our community as a small group of breeders have chosen to summarily ignore them and have even started a national breeders association to circumvent the GSMDCA's attempts to steward the breed. This article was originally written in May of 1999 and discusses the differences between the old GSDMCA breeder guidelines and the Leonberger breeding regulations. While the new document is an improvement, the fact that it allows breeders to use dog's prior to their second birthday (a compromise that came about during GSMDCA Board of Directors discussions during the approval process) is in my opinion, flawed. Note: References below to the out of date GSMDCA.ORG site have been corrected thanks to the hard work and dedication of Steve & Ardy Hofmann. Ardy has since passed away but her love for the breed and her tireless work ethic on behalf of swissies everywhere still stands as a beacon and example for those of us left behind. You are truly missed, Ardy! Leonberger/GSMD Breeding Comparison"So... what does it matter?... they are two different animals. Why should I even care what some other breed does when it comes to the breeding process for our GSMD?" Good question... hopefully this article comparing the GSMDCA "Breeder Guidelines" to the "Breeding Regulations" of the Leonberger Club of America will answer that question. I have included a link to the Leonberger Club of America's website LCA "Breeding Regulations" at the end of this article; it might be helpful to print out to refer to during the reading of this article. Unfortunately, the Greater Swiss Mountain Dog Club of America's website <http://www.gsmdca.org> doesn't have the Breeder's Guidelines posted and even if they were, most information on the rarely-updated website is either incorrect, out of date or both. I borrowed a copy of the previous and current versions of the GSMDCA Breeder Guidelines from a friend. Comparison - Leonberger vs. Greater SwissPart I: Where is the focus?The first thing you will notice when comparing these two documents is how they are titled; Leonberger Club of America Breeding Regulations (hereafter referred to as LBR) and the Greater Swiss Mountain Dog Club of America, Inc. Breeder Guidelines (hereafter referred to as GSBG). Without going any further than the title of these documents, we already have established a fundamental difference in how these two clubs approach their respective rules. The Leonberger Club of America "regulates breeding" while the GSMDCA "guides breeders". Stare at it long enough and you start to see apples and oranges. Why? Because - from its inception - the stewards of the Leonberger breed were focused on the breed... the initial postulate of their constitution put the betterment of the breed at the heart of their code of ethics. Have you seen a copy of the Code of Ethics for the GSMDCA?... neither have I. In the most recent approved incantation of the GSBG, the focus was changed to put the breeders in control. This concept is crucial to understanding how the process continues to work. Has it always been that way?... no. The initial GSMDCA document on breeding was titled "GSMDCA Breeding Principles", a difference that is so subtle you could read right over it and not think twice. Breeding Principles to Breeder Guidelines... diabolically simple yet devastating in its impact as we shall see. I conversed with Linda Mullins-Spiro, President of the LCA via email and she explained that the LCA was started in 1985 by fewer than 12 people, many of whom were of German ancestry living in the US. She indicated that because of their German ancestry, they were quite used to having strong breeding regulations and code of ethics. She went on to say, "Since they (the LBR) were in place long before we had many breeders, there was never much resistance to (them)--it (was) simply a matter of obeying the rules or you (didn't) get to play the game." Their LBR begins with a forward that is reflective of their heritage and lays the foundation for the document that follows:
The LBR simply and clearly states that it is the quality of the animal produced that is paramount. Words like "the highest standards", "improvement, advancement, protection" and "responsibility for the future" are the cornerstones of these statements. The words, "bound by these regulations" removes interpretation from the hands of the breeders. It is clearly states, without question... our way or the highway! The LBR then goes directly into the regulations themselves establishing a series of defined categories which govern the breedability of the bitch/dog; Category I and II (Breedable pursuant to Sec. II(C), Category III (Unrated and unbreedable) or Category IV (Unbreedable due to major faults). The Category Ratings in the LBR require that a bitch/dog be a minimum of 24 months old since one of the absolute requirements is an assignment and assignment of an OFA number (Orthopedic Foundation for Animals). This is one of the major differences between the GSBG and the LBR since the minimum breeding age for GSMDs is 15 months for the dog and 18 months for the bitch. Why? Well that depends on who you talk to. One of the largest breeders of GSMDs will tell you it is a combination of the rarity of these dogs (limited gene pool), the inherent difficulties in breeding the dogs and the health considerations of the bitch. It is this breeder's belief that the GSMD needs to be bred early and often to insure the survival of the species. I have read discussions between this breeder and our own Dr. Allen who strongly disagrees with his premise. She emphatically states that to breed these dogs/bitches without OFA numbers is tantamount to playing russian roulette with the future health of the breed. His answer to this is to say that our vet doesn't know what she is talking about. That bothers me... an untrained (medically speaking) breeder who discounts the advice of a professionally trained vet. It causes me to wonder what would make a person do such a thing. More on this thought later... back to the regulations. There is another requirement in the LBR that does not appear in the GSBGs and that is "proof of hip dysplasia-free for three generations". According to Dr. Allen's recent Health Survey, of the GSMDs x-rayed, approximately 17% had hip dysplasia which is very close to the number reported by OFA for our breed. However, that is at best a minimum number because most of our GSMDs are sold as pets (our membership is also made up mostly of pet owners) and pets aren't typically x-rayed because of the costs involved. Determining an exact number is currently impossible for our breed because we lack an Open Registry. Why don't we have an Open Registry? Many of our largest and most influential breeders won't allow it because they are afraid the information will be used against any breeder who's lines show a propensity for HD or other health related problems. The scenario most often quoted is, "You don't want to buy a dog from THAT breeder... their line is riddled with health problems whereas our dogs don't have any!" So now you might be saying to yourself... "OK, cull out the bad specimens and implement a long term breeding process that improves your line by rigorous, genetically-sound breeding practices." (I like the way you think! ;-) That would of course assume that our breeders are in this for the long haul and the betterment of the breed. But what if the flip side of that is true? Wouldn't it follow that if they stand against such practices that they must be in it for another reason?... any guesses what that reason might be? Let's look at a scenario involving the breeding of bitches. The bitches in this breed typically come into their first heat sometime around their first birthday... our bitch hit her first cycle around 14 months, her sibling hit cycle at about 10-11 months. They tend to cycle twice per year so by lowering the limit to 18 months, the easy part is to see that a breeder can get an extra litter out of a brood bitch by breeding her early. By using an average of $1000 per dog times a litter of 5-7 dogs (I have heard tell of litters as small as one and as large as 12) and you can see that the breeder stands to gross several thousand dollars from the extra litter. So much for the easy math... lets try something a little more abstract. Assume that after the bitch is x-rayed at 24 months, it is found that she has bad hips and doesn't get her OFA number. If the breeder hasn't gotten a litter at 18 months, by 24 months - , because of the OFA rating - his bitch is already out of the gene pool and gets sold as a pet ($800). Now, multiply that by more than one bitch and one can easily see that there is the potential for a great deal of money to be lost. Its simply a matter of begging for forgiveness rather than asking for permission. All of this assumes that the person even cares about the OFA. One of our breeders preaches that the OFA is a bought-and-paid-for, biased organization and refuses to abide by their assessment. This same person openly preaches the breeding of mildly dysplastic dogs - 'borrowing' a single practice from the Swiss selectively pruning it from an overall system that has other critical checks and balances in place - then defends the practice by stating the "the Swiss do it". Who are you going to believe; a trained medical professional who has dedicated their life's work to the protection and healing of animals or a breeder who stands to lose thousands of dollars of income. That's the problem I have with this "fox in the henhouse" approach the GSMDCA has chosen with respect to its Breeder Guidelines. We are allowing those who's pocketbooks are most affected by these decisions to control the process. We all want to believe the best in people... it is so easy to think, "They are such nice people (our breeders)... we just know they will do the right thing." Because after all, they gave you one of their puppies and it is the most wonderful pet you have ever owned, right?. Actually folks, you paid over a thousand dollars for that animal; don't you think for that kind of money you should at the very least get a healthy one? Michael Garvey Additional reading: Leonberger Breeding Guidelines and Code of EthicsThe Responsible Breeder & Making a Difference |