1089

LOVED FAR TOO LONG  -  an exaggeration too far
By David Hancock

   Caricature in breeds of dog has made them memorable - and uncomfortable! Cosy preferences for 'sausage-dogs' or the 'Fred Basset-look' in two particular breeds, the Dachshund and the Basset Hound, has masked the suffering endured by such breeds, as seemingly preferred by man. Some other breeds have been 'elongated' too, like the Skye Terrier, but so far without the pain and acute discomfort experienced by the first two named. To favour a breed because of its breed-characteristics is understandable but to do so whilst knowing such features can cause lifelong pain is subdued wickedness. Short-legged, long-backed offspring can crop up in a number of breeds or be introduced, as once in the Field Spaniel, to please some misguided fancier. The sadness is that exaggeration exaggerates itself, generation by generation, inflicting increasing discomfort in succeeding generations. Judges have been ignoring exaggerations for a century; kennel clubs only belatedly acknowledging their folly - and inbuilt pain!  

  In one of his invaluable books, RH Smythe, himself a vet, sportsman and exhibitor, wrote, in The Dog - Structure and Movement (Foulsham, 1970), "So far as their spines are concerned the most unfortunate are the long-backed dogs, especially the Dachshunds. The abnormal length of spine between the withers and the croup is unsupported at its centre so that undue strain falls upon the intervertebral articulations and the intervening cartilaginous discs. It has been said that the normal life of dogs of this breed is fourteen years, but the spine is good only for five years. Although Dachshunds tend to suffer at intervals from disc trouble with temporary recoveries, the tendency is for ultimate paralysis to develop at a comparatively early age." Dog breeders shouldn’t need veterinary advice to breed soundly-constructed animals, just genuine expressed affection for their breed, as well as simple humanity.

  My concern over long-backed, short-legged dogs, the exaggerated show specimens of Dachshund, rather than the working Teckels, relates to the strain on their spines on the move. Unlike longer-legged shorter-backed breeds, the dog's weight is not supported continuously by the legs. The hind legs are just not long enough to place the hind feet close to the fore feet, as locomotion proceeds. The spine therefore bears the weight unsupported and the consequent strain must be appreciable. Vets complain of seeing Dachshunds  in their surgeries only a year old but with 'five year old' spines. 'Sausage dogs' can be endearing to many, but back pain to all is best avoided, and could so easily be, in this breed - by breeding for a shorter back and lengthier legs. It's called animal welfare! Every breed has the basic right to be born without the imposition of inbred pain.        

 Encouragement comes in the form of the Teckel, the sporting Dachshund, so like a shorter-legged Basset Fauve de Bretagne, or chestnut Basset of Brittany, a most engaging little hound. Teckels have been used extensively for deer work, both in stalking and tracking. They were introduced to the UK in the 1970s, with the UK Teckel Stud Book Society founded in 1999. There are over 580 Teckels registered with the society to date. The Ryeford Chase is a private pack of 30 couple Griffon Vendeen Bassets and uniquely 10 couple Teckels, started in 1974 and willing to hunt all over the country. I have heard the smaller Teckels described as Dachsels or Kaninchen, used as rabbit dogs, on the continent, where nine distinct tests are conducted to test hunting skills, including a water trial. The wire-haired variety is favoured by hunters from Poland to Slovenia. Basset Hounds don't have to be elongated!

  The Basset Hound and the Dachshund are examples of achondroplasic animals; achondroplasia is not a disease but an inherited condition in which the long bones of the leg do not attain normal length, disproportionate dwarfism in effect. Scientists tell us that the achondroplasic short-leg gene affects heavy bone more than fine bone and that it will therefore be more difficult to obtain a short-legged dog with straight legs if the bone is heavy than if it is light. It is not surprising therefore that the straight-legged English Basset of the hunting field has appreciably lighter bone than the crooked-legged standard show-type Basset. In their book, Medical and Genetic Aspects of Purebred Dogs (Forum, 1994), Clark and Stainer report that "The Basset Hound is placed in the chondrodystrophoid group of dogs. The conformation of the breeds in this category leads to many inherent problems. The most common problem in the Basset is the high incidence of shoulder and foreleg lameness. There appears to be a high incidence of osteochondritis dessicans. Deformities of the distal radius, ulna and carpal joint are frequently seen."

 These words, from veterinary experts, provide all the evidence needed to justify arguments in favour of the need for urgent change. In their coverage of the Dachshund, these authors state: "Intervertebral disc disease is a particularly dangerous and, unfortunately, common crippler of Dachshunds. The breed is predisposed because of its conformation..."  Breeders may wish to dispute such words and refer to their own stock, but at a purely animal-welfare level, who will the legislators heed? Writing on this breed in another of his invaluable books The Conformation of the Dog (Popular Dogs, 1957) RH Smythe states: "...it is evident that the weight of the body, which is considerable, is carried upon spinal bones of more than normal length and that the greater concussion is transmitted to the spine, on occasion, because the Dachshund's legs are short and devoid of flexion or elasticity. This appears to be the reason why individuals of this breed so frequently develop 'slipped discs'."

  The wording of the breed standards of the short-legged breeds are promulgated by the KC; the Dachshund is required to be 'long and low'; the Basset Hound is required to be short-legged and long-bodied. Does that not encourage the breeding of dogs which fit those descriptions, which convey an immediate impression of phenotype to any reader. The breed standard of the Dachshund also states that "The Dachshund is a long low dog as befits his purpose in life, entering a badger set..."  Yet other breeds specially developed to go underground after vermin do not need to be so 'low and long'. It is not good sense to attempt to justify exaggerations with a false provenance. And, in these days of widespread moral vanity, it is unwise to condone word pictures which encourage conformation which discomforts the dog. Why feed your potential opponents? If you compare illustrations of Basset Hounds and Dachshunds of one hundred years ago with those of today, I don't think the word 'improvement' is appropriate.

 When I see the English Basset, the hunting variety, I see a sound symmetrical hound free of any exaggeration. Straight-legged Bassets are not a modern re-creation; both straight and crooked-legged types have been promoted, but the straight-legged type did not survive as a show dog. The Dachshund is favoured here, whereas its sister breed, the more symmetrical Dachsbracke, despite being introduced in the past has never found favour. Do we actually prefer exaggerated dogs and is that preference supported by a supine KC? When I lived in Germany, my German friends regularly accused my countrymen of favouring exaggerated breeds, citing the King Charles Spaniel, the Bulldog, the show Basset and the show Dachshund. They took me to see Teckels hunting, gleefully pointing out the differences between these admirable little hounds and our show dogs, technically of the same breed.

 The French hunting Bassets and Swiss Niederlaufhunden too are sounder in physique; the Artesien-Normand, Bleu de Gascogne and the Griffon-Vendeen have never received the same increases in ear and back length or decreases in leg length than those excesses achieved here in the standard Basset. But then the German Hunt Terrier has the same leg length now as when it was first developed. Our Scottie is lower than its ancestors, and longer-coated; the same is true of the Skye Terrier. We even once  attempted to 'bassetise' the Field Spaniel, before those in the breed came to their senses. Breeds with a working or sporting role have some protection from exaggeration but once the functional role is ignored, breed points become points to score from and breed characteristics become breed peculiarities and then exaggerations. Every dog bred with an untypical handicapping  exaggeration has been bred knowingly with that feature by someone claiming to 'love the breed'; that for me is the saddest aspect of this whole business.

  I have greater optimism over the running of the KC now than for a quarter of a century. There seems to be less 'ducking and weaving' and more awareness of their ultimate responsibility. I would like to see the KC step forward even more and be much more pro-active over matters concerning the well-being of purebred dogs. If you assume authority you have to assume responsibility too. The KC, in my view, should take it upon themselves to: conserve recognised breeds as they were originally designed; reduce the disabling exaggerations in some breeds recognised by them and insist on breed clubs pursuing a culture of breed-improvement as a pre-condition of registration. Leadership from the KC is surely preferable to legislation. It is better to be an alarmist now than an apologist in five years time. Every breed of dog must have the fundamental right to be able to live a full life, not disabled by defects introduced by heartless breeders entirely lacking in affection for their chosen breed. The have loved their breed far too long!