Breeding Landrace Dogs- preliminary thoughts.

I have some ideas about breeding landrace types. I have written other posts about it, but think I will write a new one pretty soon. I have found that dog breeders are a stubborn bunch as far as learning new points of view are concerned. I don’t know who my readers are, and some may dump me for these opinions, but I know I have the best references to support them all.

Techichi type dogs are a landrace type. The breeding is entirely different than at the AKC. The only thing an AKC breeding approach to breeding a techichi -or other landrace dog- would do would be to concentrate some techichi genes, if it is even possible without inbreeding.  BUT remember, techichi types have retained their phenotype even when crossbred extensively, so it doesn’t matter. Dog incest is not needed in landrace breeds, though it is the principle principle of the AKC breeding- in order to concentrate wanted genes.

The lab-tested dogs don’t have a lot of native genes, just enough to give the phenotype, I guess. The dogs are still popular in Tucson especially, and are 99.x% bred in Mexican neighborhood private homes, without benefit of any knowledge of breeding except to put two “Chihuahuas” together. (Or sometimes a chi/dachshund or chi-pom). The pups are given away to family and sold through putting cardboard boxes with “Chihuahua Pups” and phone numbers written on them- at the major intersections in the Mexican neighborhoods. The pups only rarely get advertised in any print media. This is backyard breeding at its best. No AKC involved, no AKC dogs involved, either.

Where I got my start in learning about landrace dogs was from three blogs, in particular. Have any of you readers ever read (Scottie Westfall) The blog used to be about dogs, so look at posts about 4 years old for that, but I love the point of view on dog politics in particular. It is now called Natural History because Scottie’s passions are so wide ranging.

or Border Wars? (Christopher Landaur) who has complied the most authentic information on Qualzucht INbreeding EVER and is so passionate his emotion pours out of every paragraph. If you can stand to look and read, you will learn about dog incest in a very scientific and accurate way. Not many people could have written this- it is top drawer information by someone who actually understands the genetics involved, AND he explains it to laymen well with lots of graphics and graphic pix.

or the Desert Windhounds blog (Jess Ruffner)  about the crossbred salukis and afghans and how the Afghanis actually bred those dogs. (She says in her ABOUT ME “If you have found your way here from somewhere the ‘reputable’ breeders hang out, the first, and most important, thing you need to know is that I am an Evil Crossbreeder™, and I don’t show my own dogs. I have some…strange…views about ‘breeds’ and dogs as biological, not mythological, entities. If these are deal-breakers for your worldview, you should turn back now.”)  She is cynical, but accurate and painfully honest. What she knows and does about crossbreeding the Afghan family of dogs has made her an outcast at the AKC, but a hero to people who want to keep genetic diversity and return inbred breeds to landrace status.

Landrace dogs are the future of dog breeding.

Those three guys’ opinions reflect  the most important voices in the future of dog breeding at the moment.  You can read their references to find where they learned their info, and I did. I spent 100’s of hours finding the best dog blogs and hundreds of hours reading these three, and their references, once I found them.  I am a dogged (wink) researcher and these three are the best dog info blogs I’ve found, so far. Their posts are hard hitting and very anti-establishment (read anti- AKC, HUAC, ASPCA, etc. ) and very pro-fact. They are all friends with each other, so finding one meant finding the other two. (I also met Fiesta Cranberry through those blogs’ comments sections- a most delightful person I wish I could meet in person.)

Anyway, this isn’t the actual post on landrace breeding, I don’t even define it here,  it is just an info pointer to get anyone who wants to learn about breeding landrace dogs going. I am introducing the words, to let you get used to them, if it is a new concept to you. If you want to read ahead on me, look it up in my previous posts  OR, go to those three blogs and get completely overwhelmed if you love to bathe in information- as I do.

Hairless Dogs: The Naked Truth

Hairless Dogs The Naked Truth, a book by

Amy Fernandez and Kelly Rhae

Self-Published, 1999 available at Amazon

Although I have mentioned this book a couple of times before, I have never reviewed it.This review is actually a summary of my opinions on the whole subject.

The Hairless Gene comes from Mexico.

I absolutely love the history section from pp 43-58. This is a very cohesive history of the original Mexican hairless dogs, with excellent illustrations. I have followed up on as many of their references as I could, which has been a lot of fun. Fernandez and Rhae conclusively demonstrate through historical references alone, that no naked dogs were ever documented before the return of Cortez from the New World. After that, references abound of naked dogs under dozens of local “breed” names.

They proved that are no Chinese hairless dogs, there are no African or Turkish hairless dogs -before the Conquest.

Since the publication of the book, the origin of the hairless allele on the FoxI3 gene known as Hh was definitively found by Swiss scientists to have first occurred in Mexico 3 thousand years ago or so. It only occurred once and the Peruvian dogs share the same mutation.

With the exception of a recently found recessive hairless gene in a rat terrier in the USA, ALL hairless dogs have the Hh gene that goes back to Mexico. All hairy dogs have an hh allele on that spot called the FOX13 gene where the mutation occurred. Only dogs with the H mutation are hairless. The HH gene is lethal and the hh is the original coated, unmutated dog that can never have hairless pups-unless bred to a hairless dog.

The Genetics of Hairless Dogs.

This book was the first book I read to even mention the genetics of hairless dogs and it describes the nature of a lethal dominant gene, as the H gene is, when expressed as HH. Pups with HH are not born. The Hh gene gives restricted hair and tooth development. There are Hh hairless dogs with varying amounts of hair from none, to a full, but thin, single coat in some Chinese Cresteds. The hairy dogs can have double and/or single coats, though I think the single coat was more common in the tropics.

The Lethal Gene.

The nature of all lethal genes is about a dominant mutation, which with one copy, will give an unusual trait ie hairlessness, bob tails and ridgebacks, all of which are examples in dogs. The reason they are lethal is that two copies of the gene give such an extreme version of the trait, that the animals do not live- if ever born. Thus double dominant genes give bobtails and ridgebacks with external spinal cords and no anuses, for instance. No hairless puppies are believed to survive the double naked HH whammy. The teeth and skin probably do not develop at all, making the embryos nonviable from almost the beginning.

Can there be a “Breed” of Naked Dogs? Absolutely not!!!

Now, I have to stop right there and point out that ALL the hairless breeders started out developing naked breeds of dogs. They get two hairless dogs and breed them together. Even today, all they talk up, is the hairless variety even though up to 50% of a hairless litter can have hairy dogs. Yet, please note, no hairy dog can have the hairless gene, because it has 2 recessive hh alleles.

What Amy and Kelly never taught us, nor even seemed to figure out for themselves, is that the coated dogs are the breed.

The coated dogs are the breed.

The coated dogs are the breed. There is no such thing as a hairless “breed”. There is only a hairless genetic variation on a coated breed. Thus, the hairless trait can be introduced into any “breed” or landrace of ancient dogs and was.

  H h
h Hh hh

H is dominant, h is recessive. Above are all the possible combinations. The HH are not born, the Hh are the hairless and the hh are hairy.

Think about it. The only way to get a hairless dog was to breed a hairless dog, so one had to get a hairless dog to begin with. Then, there will ALWAYS be hairy puppies from hairless dogs in a predetermined ratio although not in every litter.  One practice is to breed hairless to hairless, but that always resulted in smaller litters as the HH pups perished, yet hairy pups still happened because each parent has an h allele. When the odds are that two hh alleles meet up, the dog has hair, so there is no way to get rid of the hairy pups. The reason should be obvious to dog breeders, yet they are so notoriously in denial about so much, they have lost the ability to reason through a situation. The answer to the naked breed thing is that there is no naked breed, there is only an Hh gene added to whatever the mix (or Breed) happens to be.

I will not review the rest of the book, which is a detailed account of how the three registered hairless breeds were developed, the Xoloitzquintle, the Peruvian Inca Orchid, and the Chinese Crested. All three breeds mistakenly only valued the hairless variety, thus the breeds themselves have never been promoted. In the Chinese Crested, the breed is the powder puff; the naked crested dogs are a variation on the basic breed. Seems like the Peruvian breed used a hound model on which to put the hairless gene. The Xolo actually seems to be based on a common type of Mexican dog, a very handsome balanced animal with upright ears and a low curved tail.

Naked dog breeders need to face the reality of how the Hh gene works and develop the actual breed, then use some good dogs to produce the naked variation. However current AKC beliefs in eugenics style closed gene pool breeding, is refusing to admit the truth about how Hh genes work. The crested breeders have so much hair in their hairless dogs, they have to shave some of them for shows. They bemoan it, but have no clue on how to fix it- and. the AKC wouldn’t let them, if they did know how!

So here I am, back at my anti-AKC stance on the breeding of dogs.

Future note.

I would like to see the “Itzquintle” become a Mexican landrace breed, of which some are used to perpetuate the Naked allele. I think the Peruvian dogs are a hodge-podge, a very inconsistent “breed” that I would never invest in. I would like to see the Chinese Cresteds fold up, go away and learn how to breed a good dog and recognize the limits of certain genes. The powder puff version of the dog is so hairy it is almost Qualzucht by itself. The hairy Cresties should not be bred at all. Crestie breeders need to learn some genetics and realize the creators of their “breed”, were Sorcerer’s apprentices who did not know what they were doing- then or now, and thus produced a Qualzucht breed. Look up “Qualzucht” It is German for “torture breeding”.

I do recommend that people look at this book; it reveals the true origins of the AKC Chihuahua as well, and indirectly bolsters the techichi theory, although you need to follow the sources to get the complete picture.

Originally the naked gene was bred into in all sizes of dogs. Until very recently there was a line of naked Chihuahuas (techichi types) in Tucson. Apparently, at the beginning of the development of the Xoloitzquintle breed by the AKC-bbased Xolo club,  techichi-sized dogs were not allowed in at first. Now they are, but a lot of genetic material got lost in Tucson before the club made that change. I have  three sources for that info, two local one-time breeder/owners of naked Chihuahuas and Pat Kennedy, once the sec’y of the Xolo club in the early years -and my Great Aunt, as well. I interviewed her about the early days of the Xolo club at a family reunion, about when she was active in the beginnings of the Xolo breed. She knew a lot about the Tucson scene in the 1950’s when there were lots of naked techichi types.

After thoughts: Qualzucht and naked dogs

After having owned 3 naked dogs, I have come to realize that I totally love the hairy dogs of the breed and would have one any time,  I would not ever own another naked dog. I think it is a weird kind of cultural appropriation to keep breeding these dogs as pets. The original breeders, Aztec ancestors, considered the naked dog sacred to one of their Energy Streams, (I hate the word “gods” in English; it has the wrong connotations for Aztec thought) called Xolotl, the dog-like, twin-like other half of the Quetzalcoatl Energy. The dogs need special care; most have bad dentition, even when bred from hairy dogs with good dentition. The skin itself is extremely vulnerable to all kinds of conditions, all its life- which too often ends with skin cancer.

Tosso Lieb, the Swiss scientist who traced the age and geography of the naked gene has long since reached the conclusion that breeding for nakedness is Qaulzucht, a kind of torture breeding in which humans make their dogs endure an unnatural condition of breeding which distorts the animal. Flat faces, are an especially egregious form of Qualzucht as it affects the internal temperature control and breathing of the dogs with the trait. Just because dogs produce genetic sports- especially when inbred, does not mean man needs to make dogs into an animal that gets bred for the weird trait.

There is not one word of the genetic struggles of the Chinese Crested breed to maintain its baldness in the proper places, in this book, nor of the ethics of breeding weird genes into dogs. They are proud members of AKC-think, not independent scientists who really examined the trait. Just to have a different looking dog, is an ego trip for the owners- it always has been, and naked dogs are no exception- witness the mass killings of hairy pups for decades. If they didn’t have the weird trait, they were worthless dogs.

On the other hand techichi dogs, although small, only have the one weird gene for smallness, which when bred to an extreme is Qualzucht, but in the ordinary 10-20 pound size produces devoted and quite long lived house pets who are a bit high strung about company, but are calm and easy to live with, in general.  In the old days, here in the northern deserts,  the smallness was a trait that allowed even the poorest people to be able to feed their dogs, who also were good at getting and eating rodents. So, even though their smallness does impose some weirdness, like the big eyes, the techichi type is hardy and long lived with no discomfort or special treatment. A good little dog.

My Favorite Premises and Plans for Techichi Dogs.

Techichi Dogs

MY Premise: The techichi type little dog is alive and well and has retained its original phenotype, even though taking on many Eurodog genes. It is the parental stock of the AKC chihuahua, not the reverse.

  1. This phenotype averages 10 pounds as opposed to the akc chi artificially held at 4 pounds,
  2. The dogs look like little deer with large eyes, upright ears and at least average length legs, usually short hair, though hairless and long haired occur and always have, long before the Southwest became part of the USA.
  3. If you have one that looks like this, get it tested at the Mars Lab. There is a fantastic comment somewhere on this site from a vet at that project who says many techichi types are turning up with some native genes.
  4. Let’s separate these guys from the AKC chis by calling them Techichis. Remember,  the more techichi-sized dogs are tested and the more native genes show up, the more different native genes may be noted, so techichis will probably end up having some of the native genetic spectrum, but not quite the same from dog to dog.
  5. I have a Facebook page where you can post photos of your techichi types and comment.
  6. There are a lot of techichis that need rescuing from shelters. Many are put there because they turn out to be 10 pounds instead of 5, because they were called “Chihuahuas” when they were sold and raised false expectations of tiny adult size in the new owners.
  7. You can spread the word about techichis as opposed to Chihuahuas by sharing your Techichi posts on your Timeline.
  8. Let’s not get too technical, all techichi types are the type they are BECAUSE they have always been out-crossed to unrelated dogs. If your dog looks like a techichi, but does not test like one, let us know.
  9. I think that the techichi should be recognized by its phenotype, whether or not it has native genes. Whatever its genes are, they will probably breed true to type- should they be bred-which is not politically cool at all right now.
  10. Maybe we could call our dogs that have been tested “Techichis” and the ones with the proper phenotype, “techichi types”. After all, until genetics came along, all the earlier people had to go by was phenotype.
  11. This little guy already is far more common than the AKC sub-type. Maybe several hundred times more common, though that is a guess based on my experience, not actual counting,
  12. Let’s get this sweetie of a dog out from behind the false “Chihuahua” label.

If enough of us flow through my website and Facebook page, someone should come along that has the proper temperament and skills -and youthful energy, to get some kind of journalism going on the subject, other webpages, and/or an association going that can reach critical mass in making the techichi type as well known as the Chihuahua. But this is already a very popular dog, even if no one recognizes it -except us.

I am really just an idea person. I got this idea that the oversized chis were the parental stock of the AKC chis and were the original native stock. I demonstrated it with the  history available from various dog books I could buy on Amazon. Now, genetic testing has confirmed native genes in the techichi types. I feel like my idea is validated properly from  two important sources, but I am 75 years old and don’t have the energy to promote this idea beyond posts in this blog, and asking people to share on my Facebook page. Somehow, I don’t think posts about oversized Chihuahuas will go viral, but even a few hundred more techichi people on Facebook is far more attention and knowledge than has ever happened, before.





Techichi Type Dogs, Chihuahuas, and Genomes.

Since I last posted, I have learned that two techichi type Chihuahua dogs that I know of, have been tested genetically. So far, they both do have Chihuahua genes. But, these dogs are not the descendents of the AKC Chihuahuas, they are similar to the parental stock.

I hope more people do a genetic test on their techichi dogs- It was around $60, the last time I checked. This website could become a place where we gather that information together, and maybe share the whole genomes, somehow.

The parental stocks of the AKC Chihuahuas were landrace dogs. This meant that outside genes could and did come in, so I suspect the techichi type genomes have a lot of diversity – yet the techichi, deer chi population maintains its original archetype. It is theroretically possible that combinations of other kinds of dogs could give a classic Chihuahua look. Such as the Min Pin. There are lines and mixes of Minpins that look like the deer Chihuahuas, especially when they are black and tan rather than red.

Many native nations had small dogs, the mutation for small dogs happened before the crossing of the Bering Strait, so the Igf1 gene certainly came to the Americas. Even if smallest dogs did not, some small dogs did.

All of the depictions of small dogs in old North American art have the same basic shape, prick ears and a relaxed tail. Coat types and colors varied, but the dog type stayed constant to the original dog shape, that of a wolf. Dropped ears and other features that deviate from the wolf archetype come from inbreeding closed populations. There were virtually no closed populations in most of the Americas before the development of dog breeds in Europe in the 19th Century madness, infected America.

Therefore, I think that any Euro genes that get into the native techichi type population are mostly recessive, so they disappear in the first generation and will only be seen again if two matching recessives meet, which is unlikely in an open population. Therefore I think anyone who has a small dog with prick ears and short hair has a techichi type for breeding purposes, especially if bred to another dog with the deer chi look.

What I am saying is that, in my humble opinion, genes are genes, wherever they come from, and if a small, short  haired longish legged dog with prick ears and a relaxed tail wants to be a techichi type, they already are. Above all, the techichi is a type, a phenotype, if you will. As long as the phenotype remains constant, it does not matter where the genes that give the type come from, one bit.

Having said that, I bet the vast majority of genetically tested big Chihuahuas, deer Chihuahuas, or techichi types will have some genes in common with the AKC Chihuahua, which is an inbred (read small number of diverse genes) descendants of the original native dogs. The true techichi type spectrum of genes will prove to be MUCH greater than the AKC Chihuahua has.

In the world of landrace dogs, forget the inbreeding, forget purity of blood concept- which comes straight out of eugenics, forget even the genetics, go for the phenotype. That is how the old dogs looked, that is how the dogs today look. If they have the phenotype of a techichi type, they are a techichi type (no capital letters) and any breeding with another techichi type will give nothing but techichi types, unless, very rarely, two recessives meet up that change the phenotype- ie short legs.

Let us continue to collect techichi types from shelters and pounds, none of whom will able to breed. Maybe someday it will be respectable to openly breed techichi types, but for now there are plenty of them available for adoption.

still sputtering

I haven’t been able to access this blog for a long time, but I am now somewhat back. No new posts on the actual subject yet, but have to say I am so delighted to see all the folks with techichis! I will monitor comments here more quickly.

I struggled to find a good wiki type program so people could post – and post pictures of their techichis and interact. After trying a lot of things, I decided the closest match for want I want is my Facebook page so please post pix and interact there. You seem like a great bunch of people and so that could work.

As for this blog, I need to organize subjects, edit, and clarify more than add more of the same…Maybe in 2016 with a new computer…

Native American Dog Breeding vs the Eugenics Movement in Breeding Dogs


If one inquires academia about “native American dogs”, the response is that there are no more nAds. They were overwhelmed by Euro dogs. They died of diseases the Euro-dogs brought in. Though I can’t find the actual sources that make those claims, they seem to be dogma.
(nAd: native American dog is not a breed name thus only “American” is capitalized)

nAds may not have been breeds as we think of them today, but they did come in distinct types or landraces that looked very much alike and were close to the wolf archetype in the prick ears and relaxed tails. They came in sizes roughly equivalent to foxes, coyotes and small wolves. No odd mutations marked the common dogs of the Americas, they retained the general shape of the wolf, though the particulars varied. The Harvard scholar , Grover Allen, who studied the entirety of nAd literature at the turn of the 20th century called the common dogs, Common Dogs. And that is because they were common, and found all over North America. This is the dog depicted in many artworks by 19th century Euro-artists who painted all aspects of the lives of various tribes.

These dogs all shared a phenotype, the general phenotype of the wolf. None of them shared the same “genotypes” with each other, because they were very outcrossed. There must have been times when dog populations got a bit inbred compared to free ranging wolves, due to a lack of fresh blood within a group, but these times rarely lasted and new dog blood was always welcomed.

The concept of sharing a genotype to be a true example of a breed or type of dog arose pearl dog croppedlout of the Eugenics Movement as it was quickly applied to dogs. The most elite of the Victorian era, the royalty, and to some extent, the nobility had kept a closed registry on themselves for many generations previous to the expression of the Eugenics movement by Sir Francis Galton, an unfortunate relative of Charles Darwin and quite inbred, himself. That is, the Eurostocracy bred from within themselves, a small, elite group of people who sought to contain the power of European thrones amongst the smallest group of people possible. This narrowing of purity in the royal bloodlines actually arose out of the idea of keeping royal power intact.

francis galtonSir Francis Galton, Father of the Eugenics Movement cousin of Charles Darwin

Generation after generation of these royals and nobles had married cousins and by Victoria’s age, the results of such inbreeding for many generations had begun to manifest in deadly ways. Deeply buried recessives started to couple up more and more often resulting in genetically based problems such as hemophilia and the “Hapsburg jaw”. The absolute worst of these genetic problems piled up in Carlito, the son of Phillip of Spain (ca 1700). Phillip himself was handsome and healthy in appearance, but his bloodline was so messed up, he could not produce a healthy, fit heir to the throne. Carlito was a dwarf, with diminished mental capacity and the most exaggerated of the Hapsburg jaws. He was also an emotional tantrum throwing mess who could not entertain a real concept of rulership.

carlito of spainCarlito of Spain.d. ca 1700 the first real monstrosity of Hapsburg inbreeding.
Charles II was moderately more inbred than the average among the offspring from brother-sister matings.

About the time the royals were figuring out that they needed new healthy blood and began to marry non-relatives or at least, distant relatives, Darwin published his theory of evolution. He was clueless that genetics was the basis of how evolution happened, let alone how genes worked, though he got the basic principles right.

So a big piece of the puzzle was still missing when Darwin’s so-called genius of a cousin, Francis Galton, seized upon his cousin’s work with a bunch of half-baked ideas about how to breed “better” people using the principle of “survival of the fittest”. He called his new theory of people-breeding, “eugenics”. He was still embracing the idea that royals should breed to royals as much as possible and nobles should try to upgrade their own bloodlines with royal blood, even if it was not legally recognized. He also thought that the unfit should be culled and prevented from breeding.

Well, these ideas soon ran into problems when applied to people, so the Galtonites who had focused on controlling the breeding behaviors of humans were soon recognized for what they were and disparaged, if not made illegal.

Strangely enough, while these ideas of pure breeding the best people and culling the others was soon squashed, those same principles were embraced by the dog breeding elite who were, of course, all influenced by the aristocratic Galton’s ideas. The idea of purebreeding elite dogs out of rough country stock dogs was the very expression of eugenics and dog breeding was the ultimate manipulation of “purebred” dogs and the “closed registry” was the ultimate expression of the principles of eugenics.
On the other hand, nAds were generally so outcrossed, weird genes hardly ever doubled up and became manifest, and though this seems to have happened many times, the general tendency was for the odd dog’s genes to melt back in to the general population within a generation or two. Although there were exceptions, this was the dominant tendency and so nAds tended to remain generally wolflike from large to small dogs.

Although purebred dogs can be said to share “genotypes”, this is an entirely new concept in dog breeding in the last 150 years. This word is a cleaned up way to say, “overly inbred” However, even people who disparage the closed registry policies of kennel clubs, if they have AKC dogs, they believe the genotype should be maintained as an intrinsic part of the breed.

They believe the genotype is everything! This is entirely racist thinking intimately connected to the true identity of the dog in question. Native American dogs are not about genotypes! They are about phenotypes. Genotypes are an aspect of Galtonian thinking. Phenotypes can sustain a large variation in genotype, yet all look similar.

adopt a shep huskyA belief that genotypes must match is behind the claim that nAds are extinct. This is an idea based on a eugenics theory that to be a true Native American Dog, your genes must match the genes of dogs who were here before the Conquest to a high degree even if a dog looks like a typical nAd. As I said before, this whole idea of requiring matching genes to be declared an aNd is pure eugenics theory put into practice.

I know that practically 100% of the American Indian Nations had dogs and loved dogs. One thing about dog people is that many fancy the different looking dog, so when Euro dogs arrived, they were probably embraced by any native who could get one. No doubt the new dogs, most with dropped ears, bred freely with the native stock. I would even guess the Euro-type dogs spread out more quickly than the Euro peoples, being that the entire continent was a vast intertwined network of trade and trading routes. I even think that grandfather of a breed, the St John’s Water Dog, could have arisen from an early mix of native and Eurodogs. Crosses with Eurodogs probably contributed to a lot of American hound breeding, too.

Eurodogs is my word for European created dog breeds.
My Pearl and the Wolf PackThere are many examples of dogs that look like the old native American common dogs still showing up in animal pounds across the nation. They are practically always called “husky/shepherd mixes” by the pounds. I am sure that some are husky shepherd crosses and that a few are other crosses that create a similar phenotype. The funny thing is, that if you took two such mixes and bred them, the offspring would retain the same phenotype as the parents, though there will be variations in tail set and ear set and/or size, coat length, texture and color, or the spitz tail can show up now and then. No matter what shows up, breeding the next generation from unrelated dogs with the husky/shepherd phenotype will produce more husky/shepherd lookalikes. It is a surefire formula to produce dogs that look more like wolves than any but a few brand new breeds of dogs. They can look very wolfy, but it is easy to see that are not wolves.

just a note

I am transferring all my dog posts from all over the blogoverse to this blog, so some of them may not be new to you- depending on which of my blogs you read, but I think they will be new to  lot of newer followers of this blog.

Get the Eugenics out of Dog Breeding!

Let’s take a look at the bio-social movement of eugenics as applied to breeding registered kennel club dogs.

In order to relate to what I am saying, first you must understand that the individual dog breed clubs and kennel clubs of America have used principles of eugenics as a foundation for all their other breeding choices in picking two dogs to breed to get registered AKC pups.

Many dog breeds’ looks have changed over time. Usually not for the better and that trend is still in full force, today, though registered dog entries into kennel clubs have dropped to levels seen in the 1950’s from its high point in the 80’s-90’s. It looks like a lot of dog people do not want AKC dogs because total numbers of dogs in households have increased over the same period.

Eugenics generally has a bad name and it is for several good reasons. First, the Wikipedia definition:

“Eugenics is the applied science of the bio-social movement which advocates practices that improve the genetic composition of a population, usually a human population.[2][3] It is a social philosophy advocating the improvement of human hereditary traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of more desired people and traits, and reduced reproduction of less desired people and traits.'[4]

Lets just take the word “human” out of the equation and substitute “dog”. Then we get:
“Eugenics is the applied science of the bio-social movement which advocates practices that improve the genetic composition of a population, usually a dog population. It is (also) social philosophy advocating the improvement of canine hereditary traits through the promotion of reproduction of more desired dogs and traits, and reduced reproduction of less desired dogs and traits.” This is the philosophy of all kennel clubs today- although the UKC is a little less so.

The half-baked ideas of a man with some ‘street cred’ amongst the gentry became popular in the 1850s. Because he was vaguely related to Charles Darwin and was aristocratic, these concepts became very widespread among upper class and well educated people starting in the 1850’s. First off, eugenics explained their own superior position in life. It was their “breeding” that was superior. And the higher one’s rank in society, the better the breeding. And of course, the same was true of their dogs especially, though other domesticated animals got experimented on to “refine” the “breeding”. They, themselves already were examples of fine breeding

This is racist, or course, with whites at the top and blacks at the bottom and is still the true foundation of racism- that one’s breeding is superior to another’s. Fear of mixing blood created the anti-miscegenation laws among people. Many dog breeds’ looks have changed over time. Usually not for the better and that trend is still in full force, today, though registered dog entries into kennel clubs have dropped to levels seen in the 1950’s from its high point in the 80’s-90’s. It looks like a lot of dog people do not want AKC dogs because total numbers of dogs in households have increased over the same period. laws where they were enacted widely across the United States. And besides the less evolved ape-people, there were the poor and misbegotten. Some people advocated the second part of the equation as well, in the form of forced sterilization, even in the US. But when the Nazis became big time followers of Galton’s ideas, the majority of Europe and the US immediately put a stop to doing these kinds of things to humans. And since then, eugenics has had a very bad name and has been completely discredited by science. Only a few, creepy people (who do not believe in science?) still believe in its precepts any more.

Except with dogs. Dogs became the subjects of eugenics experiments immediately upon Galton voicing them. People realized they could change rough local landraces and curs of various types into sleek looking dogs with more and more exaggerated features such as long hair, wrinkles, shape of the skull, etc. The standard is a breeding standard to which club members must refer. So they did what could never be done with people. They closed the studbooks of their own breed clubs and no dog that was not a descendent of a dog “registered” in their stud books could enter their exclusive breed clubs. The 1850’s began an intense period of people creating breeds from scratch or taking working stock and refining its looks. Breed clubs only went on looks to create a dog a champion. They did not go on health or refraining from exaggeration. In fact, these manipulators of dog flesh delighted in the odd and grotesque. A breed would be created by the club, then the club would proceed to exaggerate the distinguishing features of the breed in further generations.

Many dog breeds’ looks have changed over time. Usually not for the better and that trend is still in full force, today, though registered dog entries into kennel clubs have dropped to levels seen in the 1950’s from its high point in the 80’s-90’s. It looks like a lot of dog people do not want AKC dogs because total numbers of dogs in households have increased over the same period.

The other trend of breeding working dogs for looks created a split in the two types, the natural and the artificial breed. Landrace terriers, collies or spaniels that became the originators of the registered version of a given breed, in their show dog forms were soon criticized for not being able to do what the landrace animals did. The often lost their function as part of being bred for looks. And that is still the complaint, today.

The general concept of AKC breeding is to “fix” the traits they like in a breed of dog by breeding the good example to another good example. The ideal is to get rid of those uncouth dominant genes and keep the refined recessives. Elimination of the dominant form of a trait will cause future generation bred to another recessive of the same kind, to “breed true” and guarantee all future dogs with those recessive traits will look the same in that trait. This kind of gene elimination has had bad side affects in often lowering the general health of the breed. There are things we don’t understand tied to those dominant genes. Sometimes the piling up of certain genes will clearly affect the dog’s physical soundness and health.

Even when some recessives line up in a certain dog and another trait is not liked, the dog is not bred. But what is good for a certain breeding program may not be good for the breed if its genes are not kept in circulation in the entire gene pool of a breed. Because the group of breed-founding dogs tends to be of very few genetically distinct individuals when the books are closed, the breed immediately starts losing genes of those founders.

Inbreeding is the method of choice to fix a trait in a dog. Take the dog with the preferred trait and get as many pups as possible from it which you then breed to each other to spread the new founding dogs’ gene pattern into the entire pool. One way to do this is by picking stud dogs that are winning for their looks in the ring and breeding them to as many females as possible, no matter how close the blood lines.

Well, dogs have wonderfully plastic genes and they can take quite a bit of strong inbreeding at first- if you get rid of the culls. If a bad genetic trait shows up that say, cripples the dog, it will be killed. By breeding the best examples to each other, no matter the relationship, many breeds of dogs have huge numbers of fixed traits and if bred to another dog of the same breed will produce dogs that look like the parents.

When AKC breeders get unfortunate examples of inbreeding, they cull their own litters- usually with a secret sense of shame that their dogs need so much culling. It is mainly for this reason that breeders of AKC registered dogs control the new owner’s breeding rights, for life. When novices get two beautiful registered dogs and the breeding rights are not controlled, the owners of the dogs might breed them -and if they do, it is still likely there will be culls. Novice AKC owners are at risk of having a dog with recessive genes that are detrimental, but may not have the determination to cull.

This is why dog breeding is a mystery and dog breeders insist only someone who knows the breed (themselves) should breed. A purebred dog breeder must cull, though it is not popular to talk about why, because the general public might wise up at the manifest results of ongoing inbreeding. Even though dogs can quickly be refined to a pretty good “Type” by intense inbreeding and culling, eventually all the dogs in a closed registry will share more and more recessive genes in common. Recessives genes have a kicker. Though you can get all your breed looking consistent, when the gene pool of a breed begins to be shared by all, detrimental recessive genes have a much better chance or meeting up.

Most of the hideous genetic problems facing purebred dogs today are from bad recessives meeting up. Most of the recessives were in the wolf gene pool long before man tamed dog. But because wolves almost always breed with unrelated wolves, the recessives have astronomical chances of meeting up, and when they do, the animal usually can’t live a wolf’s life. All dogs get their genes from the wolf gene pool and recycle them forever except for the rare mutation here and there. But when you take a gene pool of less than 100 genetically distinct founders and close it to new blood forever, even the largest gene pool is going to share a lot of recessives working their ways to the surface. Nowadays in several breeds, every breeding with another dog of the same breed is closer genetically than a sister/brother mating, there were so few founding members of the breeds.

And where did these kennel and breed clubs get these ideas? From eugenics, of course.

I have many other articles in this blog that explain how to breed dogs before the kennel clubs came along and it is not hard to do

Principles of Breeding Techichi Dogs

Musings on Landrace Dogs
Almost all dogs are purebred, designer mixes, or mutts, and the kennel clubs only deal with the purebred ones. These dogs all have a high CoI, that is, a high amount of inbreeding. The results of 100 years of this inbreeding has resulted in more and more sickly breeds, just as what happened when European royalty engaged in inbreeding for generations. Spain ended up with a king who was retarded, an emotional mess, dwarfed, with the huge Hapsburg jaw that prevented him from comfortable eating. And that was the end of that line in Spain.
I am not a dog breeder. I am not encouraging anyone to breed dogs and I encourage people to adopt dogs from pounds, but I do feel this is an important issue for any intelligent dog owner to consider. If it has no other result than increasing pressure on the kennel clubs to open up their registries to out- crosses, I will be happy.
About the time royalty started bringing in fresh blood to their lines, the kennel club in England was developing the closed registry, which resulted in all the dogs in a breed being related to most of the same founding fathers. The royalty changed their breeding practices when the results of inbreeding became plain when the recessives for genetic diseases started showing up in their children. The kennel clubs have reached the same point, but do not want to recognize how terrible a closed registry is, so they go on breeding unhealthy dogs.
Since the kennel clubs engage in terrible breeding practices, there is no well-known model of healthy breeding practices among dogs. However, every other domestic animal has developed and uses good to excellent breeding practices, based on genetics and the principle of out-crossing. The are distinct breeds in every other kind of domestic animal from chicken to goat, including sheep, horses, and cattle. How do they keep each breed distinct, yet healthy? They out-cross within lines of the breed as much as possible and when they do get into some genetic problems in certain lines, out-crossing to another breed is used because type can be restored in just 3-4 generations. The kennel clubs, with a very few exceptions, do not register out-crossed dogs or previously unregistered dogs of the same breed. They may on the point of change, however.
There is a dog world outside AKC dogs. Working dogs are not usually registered, border collies and non-kennel club Russell terriers, are available and a couple of other ‘breeds’, but more and more ‘breeds’ are falling into the ‘kennel club’ trap only it’s the UKC, which the AKC snubs for registering ‘mutt’s.
Landrace dogs.
Well, let’s take working Border Collies as a prime example of how to breed an non-AKC dog. What do working border collies do? They herd, usually sheep. The farmer knows how to breed sheep to keep them healthy strong and working, and they bred dogs the same way. The result is that working collies are not as fancy looking as purebred Border Collies; they vary more in shape ear and tail sets, because those traits don’t matter. What matters is breeding good worker to good workers, smart dogs to smart dogs. Line breeding or inbreeding are only used in extremely particular circumstances, because it is better to avoid it, yet the collies are easy recognizable as Border Collies by anyone who knows the breed. Border Collies are indisputably a prime example of a landrace dog.
We must look back in history before there were any kennel clubs to remember how “breeds” of dogs were maintained. Dogs had to be useful to be kept, so many regions tended to have a type of useful dog. A very early type was the coursing hound typified by the modern varieties of Saluki, Afghan, and the greyhound. These guys share a similar body structure with long legs. The amount of hair, the size and shape of the ears might vary, but they could all run and catch game, and loved to do so. they were indeed useful dogs, so each region of the Middle East had its own variety of courser. Local dogs shared a gene pool, but new members were allowed, so it was an open gene pool, much like the Border Collies.
Each landrace type of dog was a local dog, suited to the environment in which they lived and bred. In the New World, it was the same way. The northern dogs tended to retain their wolfie look, though they were thoroughly domesticated. They were pullers and beasts of burden, though it is probable there were good hunters among them too. Although it is probable inbreeding happened and more distant line breeding, there are so often culls in the first generation, let alone the second generation, that soon, there were fewer puppies from those inbred dogs, and more culls, so that usually, the more heterogeneous dogs survived and were healthy.
Landrace breeding today, would be easy. Let many members of each generation of a landrace dog breed to an unrelated dog of the same type, rather than just a few breeders breeding to other inbred dogs – and making a profession of it, Today, that could be limited to one litter before neutering. This kind of breeding every generation keeps the dogs healthy, typey, yet heterogeneous. It could encourage the right kind of backyard breeding of landrace dogs for many dog lovers, rather than an small group of elite AKC breeders. It is the AKC dogs that are the targets of puppy farms and the large breeders-for-profit.
Perhaps you have already jumped ahead and wondered about breeding the Techichi to continue its landrace character? The Techichi is a desert dog, and a house dog, often they are good at catching moving things and noticing anything minutely different in its territory. Being intensively loyal, to boot, they have a lot of fans. Well, there is already Techichi breeding going on in Tucson, right now. These deer type Chihuahuas were never part of a registry, yet everyone recognizes the type immediately. Various people have Techichi type dogs they want to breed and they agree to a mating for it and have puppies.
James Watson, a primary founder/breeder of the earliest Chihuahuas, came out west in 1877 to get the small dogs in Tucson and El Paso, and Ida Garrett and many other people followed suit. They were then called Arizona dogs, It was Watson’s fancy that he called them Chihuahuas; he admitted he never found one in Chihuahua, only the US!
That original stock is still being bred in Tucson today, but never by kennels or puppy farms. Big Chihuahua are just not appealing to those types. Only a small percent of these dogs end up in the pound or a shelter, but there is usually at least one. Over the last 6 months I have collected pictures of 25 or so of these dogs and display them on the Gallery page.
You must admit, they have a very strong type and size, in common, yet have never been inbred.

This video, “Pedigreed Dogs Exposed” is an extremely important expose of serious health problems with purebred dogs registered with kennel clubs in England and the Americas.

This page will present the arguments for recognizing these problems and the larger, philosophical issue of qualzucht, a German word literally meaning “torture breeding” but referring to enshrining dangerous and unhealthy conditions in breeds, such as the extreme flat faces in the current pugs and bulldogs. which cause the animals an inability to regulate their body temperature.

At this years Crufts, the ultra-most chichi dog show ever, 15 breeds were put on a list to be monitored for dangerous conditions as of March 1, 2012: Basset Hound, Bloodhound, Bulldog, Chow Chow, Clumber Spaniel, Dogue De Bordeaux, German Shepherd Dog, Mastiff, Neapolitan Mastiff, Pekingese, Shar Pei, St Bernard, French Bulldog, Pug and Chinese Crested. Several dogs were publicly flunked.

The Chinese Crested, as a slightly transformed techichi, is on this list and so the relevant issues such as lethal dominants will be discussed in these pages.

probably a ‘Techichi’ dog

deer type 1

The Techichi dog is an antidote to the kind of inbreeding found in almost every kennel club breed. These dogs are usually bred by their owners and are almost always bred to unrelated dogs. This is the opposite of inbreeding or pure breeding and it has some advantages and disadvantages which are discussed on other pages.

Active again.

My Mexican hairless dog RuthieMy Mexican hairless dog Ruthie

After much dithering about getting some kind of interactive scene going with my dog blog, I quit thinking about wikis, and decided to rework this blog and include only hairless dog material. Since I have two other basic dog interests that easily resolve into two other blogs, the first one will be on small dogs, specifically the Chihuahua-like 10 pound dogs so common in the American Southwest from El Paso to Tucson to San Diego. Since I like long blog names, this one will be called, “Is there a techichi on your couch?” and it will go on my domain. The third blog will collect my posts on the non-akc breeding of dogs, so I am hoping to be provocative by calling it, “Confessions of a Backyard Breeder”. It will go on my domain

Also, I have a Facebook page at

The sub-name is native American dogs. I did not capitalize the N because I am not claiming that the domain is about North American pre-contact tribal dogs, though I gather what information I can about the subject, it is more about the dogs we have around today, especially the ones that LOOK like the old tribal lines of dogs.

deer type 1However the most popular responses to my Facebook page are from people who have techichis on their couches –  those 10 pound chi-like dogs- which do throw occasional 4-5 pound pups. These bigger dogs are still called “Chihuahuas” because they look like over-sized versions of the AKC version, but think about it, no 5 pound AKC chi ever had pups that grew to 10 pounds, yet that is the most common size of this type of dog and they far outnumber the registered version.