moosmum

Edited, 'may' be done. About as 'condensed' as it can be. I may have to sell it as fiction :) How well do you understand evolution? This might take awhile. There is no short version. Its all one way and I can't see where any ones getting hung up. 1) Domestic Dogs ARE: a single species developed through their partnerships with man. That has been the driving force behind their development. The many purposes humanity finds for dogs in their lives. The benefits to Mans existence in all the different ways found. Companions, herders, protection,hunting, tracking,rescue, fishing,security,sport retrieving, guide dogs and Show...you name it. The list is as long as we choose to make it. 2) The environment for the species IS: in a partnership with man. Almost symbiotic. Their development has historicaly come through that partnership, and environmental expectation. 3) Expectation and demands of environment: Collectively, MAN gets value from a partnership with dogs. He expects it. Experience has taught its there. That experience directs man to seek it out. Because it brings rewards. Because dogs bring rewards to man, the dogs environment favors them. More specificaly, It SHOULD favor those dogs who bring MOST value. It doesn't always happen, usualy because the messages sent from species to environment are faulty. Never from environment to species. Environment is the space you occupy. Space has no response-ability for what it contains. Its shaped by what it contains. It can only "demand and expect", based on values shown. 'Laying the blame' on environment is to disregard responsibility for the shape its in, leading to destructive behavior. Each Man will have his own individual expectations, Based on his own conditions, experience, purpose, and values hes found to support the reward he gets. Its the COLLECTIVE of mans experience, expectations and demands that give environmental expectation and demand. That drives the evolution of the species in what ever direction that takes it. In how we respond to those expectations and demands from the WHOLE environment, individualy. In WHAT collective man is seeking and how he achieves it. The direction the species dog takes in its evolution is based on what we humans collectively Expect and Demand of it, As the natural environment for the species dog. EXPERIENCE demonstrates possibilities and practices, with least negative consequence. Experience demonstrates what CAN be expected, or should. Expectations change, and the species will change to reflect that. According to what values we DEMONSTRATE as worthy to emulate. There is no value with out purpose. Purpose gives value. A stick is just a stick until purpose or value is shown. There is no expectation of a stick being anything else until we SEE it can serve a purpose, and recognize that has value. The environmental expectations for dogs depend on what purposes and supporting values we can individualy DEMONSTRATE to bring rewards. Demonstration leads what we expect. These demonstrations of value, and demands to emulate them, are the messages that pass from species to environment. Environment to species and decide evolutionary direction. 4) Response: Ability to respond, or responsibility: Nothing more or less than our ability to respond. To the species, to the demands of the world we live in, to the people around us etc. To respond in ways that bring maximum benefits and cause least harm is in our ability. That is responsibility, if we recognize we have it. Fixed traits of set or automatic response are reaction. Responsibility requires the overall most beneficial response. Using reason. Its response ability that gives purpose. 5) Values: Come with purpose. They support that purpose, and/or make it more effective. We gain benefit from purpose. The benefits promote values shown to best support the purpose. So you in turn support those values. For how they enhance your purpose. The values are meaningless without the purpose they support. If your stick is going to be used to spear an animal, it has purpose and value to you. You might enhance that value by choosing a straight stick, peeling the bark and hardening it in fire, because you have seen, had demonstrated it will be more efficient. You don't value putting sticks in fire, peeling the bark and hardening them. You value a well made arrow and those things simply contribute to a well made arrow. Values aren't automatic. Biology tells us that live structures must demonstrate or teach values to their environment. By responding to your environment in ways that enhance your purpose, you increase its value, and ability to support your purpose. Psychology has confirmed the same holds true of human beings. "quality" or value is taught, through the benefits they provide to purpose. As a repeated natural 'law' I believe that falls under the heading of organic physics. Why does the popularity of a breed increase after a movie or book depicting it favorably? People have seen a demonstration of a value they can recognize and seek to emulate. SO -We have environment.(or space) -Life responds. -With purpose. -That promotes values to enhance what ever purpose we are focused on. The correct response is one that allows the environment (or space) to grow and expand. To achieve successful evolution. By a demonstration of the value we bring to our purpose. Environmental expectations are not static, but depend on the make up of the environment and what values are being demonstrated. ( what is favored to take/make space in the environment) All interdependent and hinging on environment and response, with a natural balance between the two that gives a purpose the environment is invested in supporting.. We can agree on the value of a well made arrow, the practices that bring us well made arrows and learn to recognize one. But if we said animals may not be killed unless we use an arrow utilizing those practices, we have forgotten the purpose of the arrow and would never have progressed to other more effective methods. We might starve when those methods are unavailable or not the most efficient for circumstance. We can agree the methods have value, and even be united under that understanding. But the moment you try to say that value is so great it should be the only accepted way to hunt, you put all the value in the method and not the purpose, or goal. The making of exquisite arrows becomes the purpose. Purpose is forgotten. The expectation changes. We EXPECT LESS from the hunter. Simply because purpose and results aren't the focus. The ritual of making the arrow won't always bring the best results. There are better ways to 'hunt' fish, or elephants, or finches. The arts of hunting those species is lost. Parts of your purpose. Less value over all to be had from a hunt.So we expect results less often. Become more tolerant of less. So long as those arrows are beautifully made examples of symetry, their effectiveness to hunt is secondary. Better results of a hunt, maybe using dogs instead, would likely be scorned or ignored and the hunter shunned for his lack of values. Not his results. An opportunity to learn an alternative response is lost. We loose value, purpose and response-ability. Natural selection of that tribe is altered from favoring the genes of the best providers - to artificialy favoring a good arrow maker 1st, before a good provider CAN be favored. Because his tribe will tolerate no other priority. The "Values" of the hunter become the focus. Not the end goal. Not the reasoning or purpose behind the values. If those values were to become THE accepted norm by all hunters, they would no longer be able to respond effectively to the widest variety of environmental conditions. They would survive only by the success of their 'fixed trait' of arrow making. The environments and conditions where that arrow making trait is of value would be less. Not because its ineffective, But only because its value has replaced the purpose for it. The fixed trait of a species that reduces its ability to respond. And reduced responsibility to the hunt itself. That tribe of humanity would shrink its environment. To members/tribes willing to subscribe to their values 1st, and to places/species where hunting with arrows is the most likely method to succeed. The tribe looses responsibility. Teaching how to hunt well and efficiently could not be done unless the person taught has accepted that he will be hunting with arrows. The tribes diet is limited. And the 'science' of hunting is limited to archery and the game that can be hunted effectively with arrows. Its only a small part of the science being recognized as valid. Response to the demand for food is limited. There is conflict of interests and needs. So here we have a shared purpose. Dogs. The K.Cs had a great idea of using a record of ancestry to make it easier to understand the genetics of the dogs. To promote the value of understanding a dogs background and what its likely to bring to a mating. A means to increase value. Values that could be promoted and shared. Bringing e more value to those who choose to keep dogs, so that more people choose to do that. Growing the environment for dogs. AND increase environmental expectations that dogs DEMONSTRATE the value of good practices. Dogs shown to have that ability to respond. We have accepted OUR responsibility to see that they can do so as effectively as possible. But instead the founders tried to split the species. Along lines of values. It can't be done. The value is in the dogs and is only as good as that demonstrated. The breeders can not efficiently respond to the expectations and demands of their environment, so its seen as hostile. Just like a arrow maker in an ocean, or trying to demonstrate his values to a group of rifle owners who need meat now. There is a division of the environment. There is division in the messages being passed from the species to the environment. One group says their practices give value, and no other practices can. But they don't demonstrate that value until a person accepts they will hunt for it with an arrow. The other side of the divide is demonized for lack of values REGARDLESS of results or practices. So they also become ineffective at demonstrating values or practices that work. If values and practices aren't demonstrated, they fade away and the original purpose is redundant, if its not essential for survival.The messages from species to environment have been interrupted. Another perspective: Single species split along value lines- For every action there is an equal and opposite re-action. If one tribal camp or environment alone stands for values, practices and ethics what must the other become? If all who believe in the above belong in the 1st camp, who can achieve recognition for those values, or teach them else where? There is a taught assumption. They can't realy stand for those things, or they would belong to the 1st camp. There is no incentive to promote values( or even science) if they WILL NOT be recognized. If they are not valid. Within the 1st camp itself, the message is to divide based on values. So we see division of breeds. Division of healthy from non healthy, division of purpose. Since the values are inseparable from purpose, The only way division can be accomplished is to reduce the environment in which values can be found. the K.Cs survive so far on a message of reduction. So values become a dividing line between environments. Purpose, not being demonstrated, is lost. Values that could add to purpose are lost. Environment able and willing to support that purpose is lost. The environment shrinks. Not only are messages of values and purpose being lost, we go the other way to prove 'opposing' values are failing and are a burden to environment. Urging the environment on to reject the species and its purpose bit by bit. The grey hound industry. P.D.E. pet shops, B.S.L. puppy mills. Instead of demonstrating how to achieve the MOST VALUE from a COMMON purpose, We show the cost of individual purpose. The environment acts on the costs instead. The messages from the environment to the species and Vs/Vs is interrupted and replaced with the messages from the K.C environment . That ruling sends its own message to the K.Cs. Divide the value, and decrease the environment in which it can be found. Every time you divide, its to get rid of some thing. That has no place in the K.Cs. A physical impossibility as direction for a viable species. You can't absolutely divide values, with out reducing where they are to be found simultaneously.

A constitution can only and will only do whats it is designed to do. The constitution sets out the goals of the organization. The rules set how thats to be accomplished. A ruling stating that a breeder must not not breed outside that system is designed to divide and reduce. That is all it can do. That is all it has done. That is all it will continue to do until there is nothing left. That is the sole purpose of that rule. Divide to achieve perfection. Its working admirably!

I find posts very hard to follow..............and I do have tertiary English qualifications!! Biology and physics might be more useful. I don't know how many more ways I can say it. A ruling against members breeding out side of K.C membership and protocols changed the pedigree system from a tool to breed better dogs to an absolute ideology. The whole human community IS the natural environment for Domestic dogs. Their values and demands have historicaly shaped the species. And the breeds. A K.C that has adopted that ruling separates the species according to what environment the dogs come from. Only one supporting that ideology being acceptable. It splits the environment for the species into groups of separate environments. Of supposed 'Other' ideologies. It doesn't matter what any single breeder was trying to accomplish,( their purpose) or how they respond to the challenges to achieve the best outcomes ( The values they bring and demonstrate.) We aren't promoting values and purpose, we are promoting an ideology. So we lose both. We aren't judging a good breeder by what he does to give us the kind of dogs we want,and promoting those proven values. Dogs that meet our expectations best. But by what group they belong to. Does it conform to OUR ideology? If not, we strive to eliminate the opposing 'ideology'. That whole environment. Instead of promoting those values shown to live up to our expectations and demands. Those that contribute to the health of our environment. An absolute ideology doesn't support the environment that gave rise to it.(here, People who find value and purpose for dogs.) It demands they support the ideology, and limits any individual response. Replaces personal responsibility with group responsibility. The purpose the dog was bred for, the values his success promotes or builds to his environment, are irrelevent to the ideology itself. An absolute ideology creates it own environment. Of adherents. The absolute ideology represents purpose and values. It takes the place of purpose and values. It does not judge others by purpose or values, which are environment specific and individual. It judges others by environment. What group they represent. The perceived ideology assigned to them. Collectively. Personal responsibility is lost in favor of supposed ideologies. Just because one is absolute.

Expectations are lowered. The value or esteem we hold for dogs is lowered. Welfare and personal responsibility are more often compromised with out a value being recognized. Predictability alone tells us the behavior of the dogs should also conform to the demands of human behavior. Its independent of our own responses and actions. Its not the owners responsibility. To ensure that they minimize the chances of these problems occurring and select dogs according to their individual environment, needs and ability. This all becomes a breeders responsibility. If the breeders don't recognize the increasing responsibility predictability alone forces on them, expectations won't be met and breeders themselves loose value. If behavior is predictable, dogs should not bite. A dog that does is faulty. Dogs should not bark non stop. A dog that does so is faulty. Dogs should walk calmly on lead. A dog that doesn't is faulty. Dogs should love children. A dog that doesn't is faulty. Dogs should not be destructive. A destructive dog is faulty. Its the breeders fault. We teach unrealistic expectations. When they can't be met, the 'product and company' is devalued. But it can't be separated from its species, so all lose value. A faulty dog is less likely to be a valued dog. And its the breeder who will be held accountable while they teach predictability is the only worthy goal. Yes, an ethical breeder takes his or her responsibilities very seriously and promotes that ideal. But there is a coda that only a K.C registered breeder can be responsible and what that responsibility entails is rarely promoted or taught outside the K.Cs membership. The K.Cs message is that "responsible breeder" is dependent on membership. Yet the less people understand of how to respond effectively to the species, whats involved in responsible breeding, the more responsibility falls to the K.Cs to meet unrealistic, uninformed demands. Yet a non member is expected to understand that membership does not bestow responsibility, to understand what it entails and how to find it. We don't seek to understand what we haven't experienced, seen or been taught exists. We can't seek what we don't know or recognize. The K.Cs are bodies that promote that understanding within their ranks, and within their ranks only. Intolerance or rejection of what lies out side the K.Cs stated areas of expertise leads to its rejection and elimination. Undesirable traits and attributes will be eliminated. Undesirable qualities have no place in the K.Cs. and will be eliminated in the pursuit of predictability. They are OTHER and unacceptable. Rejected. Thats environmental and has nothing to do with the K.Cs or their stated goals. The K.Cs can honorably object to BSL in good faith. But while they teach that dogs should be only be bred for predictability, they send a subtle message that our personal responses matter less. We are not responsible. Breeders are. So a trait that the human/dog partnership has understood for centuries becomes undesirable as we forget our own responsibilities to the species. The importance of our own actions in how dogs respond to US. As we forget our responsibilities to the species, more fault will be found. More traits (and breeders) to be eliminated. Less ability to respond to current demands. Less value to be found. Less room for dogs in the modern environment. The environment is not OTHER. It can't be eliminated. It is part and parcel of the species and our understanding and partnership with it.Its what gives a place and space to the species, IF a value is demonstrated and response is TAUGHT. Then they can be sought. Environment is what drives the species direction through what values are sought or favored. Environment gives favor to demonstrated and learned values. That is physics. That fact can't be disregarded without consequence. It doesn't mean "only the parts the K.Cs recognize", because the K.Cs are just a small part of it all themselves and can't survive with out the environment that supports the whole deal. Environment is what gives us K.C members and dogs alike. They can't help but be influenced by the environment they come from. Its our responsibility to see that the "health" of our environment gives us the best quality and value from both. Breed will not be separated from species. K.Cs will not be separated from breeders. It will always be a dog first. It will always be a breeder first. The greater value of a breed, or K.C member will always depend first on the demands of the environment and whats shown to best meet them. Through demonstrated values and the responsibilities taught to support them. The K.Cs have the "ability' for success. The 'response' is not open to them while breed is exclusive of their species.

Theres nothing wrong with an appreciation of predictability. It has a place. But life does not depend on predictable behavior. It depends on responsive behavior. In DEMANDING predictable behavior, you remove options for response. To demand breeders be recognized as such only through a K.C membership Adhering to CLUB standards with ritualized testing for predictable traits and qualities, demands ritualized responses. In the dogs and the humans. It removes available response. Directs you to favor the predictable response that achieves favor within that organization, or breed at this point in time. Not a considered opinion that allows your own experience, understanding or needs. Its not based on your own ability to respond effectively to your own unique situation/environment. The K.Cs. that rule against breeding out side their certification must be satisfied first. That is hard wired into the organization. Breeding for predictability in the breeds while allowing nothing else is achieved through removing available response. This must become evident both in body and mind. Less repertoire for response. In predictable situations there will always be a place for predictable response. The breeds have that role. But taken as the sole aim of dog breeding it doesn't demand more of the Species. It demands less.

our 4 aren't particularly noisy, only bark with good reason but I know what you mean Perse. They have near 2 acres to free range and I think that helps, little need for useless noise, just comunication. Listening to the sounds of the farm can tell you so much of whats happening in our little world. Even the magpies and chooks once you are tuned in! Kinda neat being able to sit at the kitchen table and know theres a Goanna 50 metres from the chook yard, or an eagle circling without having to step out side.

Thanks for this info. I was going to ask if anyone knew what the "dog culture" was like there today. LOL at the date, Sorry! I looked and could only see todays!

Sorry, don't know enough to embed? Basicaly, Germany has new BSL laws enacted after media hype regarding dog attacks. It seems the combination has fueled an un-precedented anti dog sentiment with dogs and owners being attacked. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1348835/kennel-club-anger-over-germany-anti-dog-laws.html

What an excellent- and correct post. Pound and rescue fees are far too high. People often surrender their dogs because they cannot afford whatever. Agree. My experience has been its often the same people filling pounds from one year to the next. The best of people WILL make mistakes, most are willing to learn from them. Repeat offenders haven't the sense to accept responsibility for themselves. I think few people CHOOSE to be A-holes.

The laws governing gene and cell behavior,"learning", reproduction, growth and response ARE repeated, endlessly through even the higher or more complicated organisms and life forms. These are the physics of biology. As much a part of physics as quantum theory. The research into genetic reproduction, using plants, that has determined viable population sizes must be considered equally relevant to all organic life forms unless/until proven otherwise. These rules learned in school are organic physics. Much easier to work with physics, than attempt to work against them. Doomed to fail. For acceptance into an environment, value must be given, taught and demonstrated. This is the response-ability of life. This is not possible if the environment is not recognized. Otherwise, the environment that allows that form must continue to reject (or stress) that form until it can respond appropriately, or face ultimate destruction. Its not viable if its unable to respond appropriately. An environment is the space you occupy. Its made up of all it contains. The healthiest environment is the one which supports the most diversity. Any part of an environment unable to accept diversity can not help but reduce the environment, or be rejected by it. Reducing diversity either way. Diversity allows maximum range of response and possibility. A life that does not recognize its environment and thus reduces it, removes response- ability and invites directionless, destructive chaos. This is what we legislate against, and how we reduce our environment. An ACCEPTANCE of environment and our response- ability to it, instead demonstrates efficient, effective direction that benefits the environment, allowing it to grow and evolve. With out, there is no growth, only stagnation and deterioration. All parts of an environment have an EQUAL response-abilty to accept and respond to the environment that supports it. Not to reject, but to respond, in an effective and beneficial manner. Space can not be shared in exclusivity. The K.Cs are an organic construct dictating a set response of rejection to environmental demands. There is no response- ability to the environment supporting this construct. The ruling against members breeding dogs outside of K.C protocols places the organization, and the pedigrees representing it, before either species it serves. It does not recognize them with out membership. It does not recognize its environment. It has ruled against it.

I think the variety in types and purpose is great! If a breeder is having trouble with a trait either way, or wants to add one for a specific reason, there are alternate sources to look to, to correct, add or override and still have a Lab.

Hi Dewclaws, I think its easier if you think of a single breed, then think of all the different environments people have to make use of that breed in. Rather than splitting the breed , it might work better to include a "purpose" listing on a dogs pedigree. To encourage buyers to think more of the role their dog is expected to play in their lives, and breeders to set clear ideals of what they are trying to accomplish. I personaly dont like the idea of splitting breeds unless its absolutely needed, because each time you do that you are closing off more the potential gene pool.

The findings of the study in your link do not support your assertion that low cost/free adoptions have no negative impact on outcome. The researchers in this study found that dogs obtained at no cost, or at a cost less than $100, were at an increased risk of relinquishment. It's good to provide links to studies, but beware of confirmation bias. Still, I think theres a lot of information to be got there. Looks like those the biggest risk factors seem to be with people who are unfamiliar with keeping cats/dogs and have little idea of what to expect. People who are unfamiliar with pet ownership and have no idea what they don't know.

Very important to me. And much harder to find than it was.

I think dogs can take a lot of credit for past human sociability and breaking down barriers. They seem to have been much more a universal interest and talking point. Less interest now, but still able to bring people together when given the opportunity. I believe they have played a huge role in human social development.

Seems to me the real problem is people aren't taking responsibility for their dogs, or for making sure they have some understanding OF dogs before they choose to interact with, or own them. Regardless of breed. Why is that? Less familiarity? No longer a visible , actively talked about part of our culture? Certainly becoming less so, and easy to see how that will lead to fewer people having any understanding of their responsibilities, or familiarity with the species before choosing to become involved with it. I think Bill Bruces ideas work when the community is involved AS a community WITH dogs. Instead of a community, whos dogs mustn't be a relevant part of it.

I think its very different within breeds, and can be individualy too, In expression, intenstity and how its managed or trained.

The fight or flight responses of other animals are much more stimulating than ordinary interaction. And once a dog has followed through for a "win" very rewarding. My interpretation is that once the dog has gone over its arousal threshold, Its near impossible to get their attention for them to listen to you. So you teach them that satisfaction comes best THRU listening, and yourself how to better get their attention and hold it by working WITH the drives and stimulation they find so rewarding. But there are all sorts of variables to affect how successful that will be.

Yes, I agree. I think she had just had enough and chose to put an end to that nonsense. Maybe the freedom to satisfy her prey drive on her own lowered her impulse control. I did ask at the time if there was a history there. They said no, must not have considered the behavior of the SWF to be relevant. Either way, the training has been doing her good.

Another update. I gave a list of reading to do- Its yer choice, leave it, NILIF and Leerburg.etc and said to expect MORE of her, not less. Let her know she had a responsibility to her freedoms. They said it all made perfect sense, took it on board and did it. Owners have implemented training and say so far... excellent!! She has had training sessions with the dog she attacked. Lots of Its yer choice and NILIF and is now doing runs every day with her owner on his bike. Was walked past a cat on lead and tho' she looked, didn't react. Fingers crossed, but its looking very good. They have moved away from the the old neighborhood and are very pleased with progress. Sounds like there may have been a little more to it as the small dog apparently was habitualy aggressively barking at her (and her smaller dog friend) before the attack. Don't you love owners like that! :D

I agree with this. I do wonder then why Pedigree dogs are marketed on the basis of simply having a pedigree- Or record, Instead of marketing the responsibilities and dedication outlined above. Using the pedigree system gives an obvious advantage to responsible breeding, when its seen as a demonstrated RESULT of responsible breeding. Not the cause, as the message suggests. One that can clearly be seen as false and not to be trusted. The record does not make the dog. Better practices do. Better practices make a pedigree, not the other way around. Yet thats the message that is being sent. It will be mistrusted because it is so often demonstrably untrue, and will continue to attract breeders who believe it so continue to show that. The record is favored before practices in the wording of the rules and constitution, while their practices are unrecognised by any means other than that record..

Why, oh why is every one so shocked and suprised?! This is inevitable while dog people chose to make welfare and irresponsible owners the priority with out with out teaching the value of DOGS. Of all types. And the value that a RESPONSIBLE breeder can bring to the community no matter the pedigree status. The K.Cs may have a huge influx of sub standard, no intention of following protocol breeders joining their ranks. That will re-inforce and increase any critism aimed at the K.Cs. Back yard breeders out, whos next in line? Do Wonders for the breeds! And another step closer to commercialized breeding.

Just want to repeat this, from me and my own gang. Best wishes to you and your gorgeous little man.

Congratulations to you, the owners, Dora and Elysia. :D Great work and lovely to see the Labs strutting their stuff once more.

Well done. The effort is appreciated :) Hope pressure will do more.