moosmum

No. Its refusal to accept our diversity for what it is......Equal in Humanity. Diversity can't be equal too. It can be Human. The SUM of its parts are equal. The different parts are not. Because as soon as you separate them for measurement, you have division. Characterisation of Human conditions as anything other than equal to their Humanity is always bigotry, and will always be a negative or reductive measure to Humanity. Assigning identities within humanity denies the diversity of human conditions. And you don't address the conditions if you are seeing some thing else because you assume the relationship is the problem. Human conditions are not subjective to us, as parts of our Human environment. We are subjective to it. We can only alter unfavourable conditions Objectively. If Education or Wealth are unequal to Humanity we alter those. So colour trans or poor are not problematic. We reduce the problems instead of redistributing them according to characterisations that create divisions. So we change our language to reverse logic.

Hard to argue with mathematical physics, but sickening to me that increasingly people are being taught to do just that. A very dangerous path we are on.

Standards of equality? Ha! Just justified bigotry. No different to any other fascist ideologies, except for its insidious signal of virtue.

Yep. Discredit what you have and its value is diminished. Less value means less support given. And there can be no distinctions made in the demand for 'Standards". Critical Theory is doing the same for Humanity- Instead of assuming equality,we are being taught to seek qualification for it. A physical impossibility, to measure equality. That demands division of the sum, into opposed factions. Based on diversity. To measure equality by its diversity can only reduce diversity because equality cancels it out. So much for cancel culture.

Makes sense to me. The commercialisation and codes of accreditation today imposes standardised training methods that favour the use of arbitrary drives. Before this commercial trend, Working Dogs were selected from on the job successes, so the best dogs would do the job required naturally, by choice. The trainers job was more to show how and when, or to teach responsibility to the job. Much like working stock dogs today that have so far avoided the impacts of more commercial, trial based lines. Selection has been removed on the basis of Response- Ability to environment, and towards recognition of cues to set actions. That requires drives that have little to do with the dogs intended purpose. Form before Function. Function is lost when its form is limited to a marginalised set of conditions.

I agree with above comments, but think we should also be looking at other implications of this trend. ie; Dogs being priced out of range of some very good homes, and in general Dog ownership not being a 'natural' expectation for people and communities. Then there there is the problem of people paying such large amounts for the right to keep a dog, and the risks of health issues. Seems to me there is an increased expectation that the 'product' not be 'faulty' so compensation and liability for (mainly) hobby breeder who have fewer resources to research and access lines either free of or complimentary to peak health. Many breeds might more effectively benefit from cross breeding to eliminate health issues if gene pools are already compromised. Less popular or well known breeds being by passed and forgotten in an increasingly commercial system, and their eventual extinction. Other breeds either not able to be bred economically, or selected from, a commercial set up.(Think larger dogs, and many working types not able to be tested effectively in their working environments) The instruction to 'Take Dogs out of their environment' is well under way and gaining momentum fast. Too late for ANKC to alter the out come in its present form and no other registry designed for the purpose of dogs, rather than 'Standards' of condition that allow no room for evolution of condition. ANKC and their affiliates have agreed to a cultural identity that does not recognise its environment. Loss of responsibility to, and purpose of Dogs is the inevitable outcome and what we are seeing in action. Without purpose and responsibility, value to environment is lost. We either need either a new registry based on biological physics of acceptance to environment, or for ANKC to step up to those responsibilities. Or domestic dogs will be lost to our grandchildren. Seen as too costly for society to maintain on welfare grounds. Thats where we are headed now. Biophysical law says.

Very sorry for your loss, a beautiful sweet face that looks so trusting in your care. So glad he found it with you.

You should see her from behind! Her owners bought her as a Mastiff Dane cross. Head on, the mastiff is clear. She may have both those, but I'm pretty sure there is more. She has bristle hairs on her chest that suggest Deer or wolf hound. A friend says Ridge back. The hair between her shoulders is more bristly/erect too, .Her ears will prick erect, with just the very tips slightly bent. That is a breath of fresh air!

Yep, I would definitely look to you for a cattle dog! That shows great stability and trainability. Congratulations! Well done. Don't you love hearing of your dogs successes in their 'working' life?! This is what I have to work with- The last sort of cross breed I expected to show the sort of stability and work ethics I was after in a large dog, but so far a start as a we mean to continue approach seems to be working very well. She seems to have a great appreciation of her un-even size advantage with Goose. Adjusting fast to being an inside outside dog, slept through her 1st night in my room no fuss. A couple messes her 1st 12 hours, but has already learned how to tell me she needs to toilet. Weight needs some increase, but her coat is glossy and it would have been easy for her young owners to have trouble keeping up with her growth. better lean than over weight I think. need a name change if any one can come up with some thing I like- Short! Her name is too close to Coda and I keep calling her that- there will only ever be one Coda for me so It upsets me to catch myself doing that.

I really hate that, with holding the price tag on an ad. I seldom enquire because I think of the saying "if you have to ask you can't afford it" and that attitude is one I have no time for. It takes little effort and could save both parties time. Its a little better in N.S.W. but I doubt I would have found a dog either, If I had been looking for a small dog. My daughter managed a lovely 11 month old re home, but only because the breeder knows her and believed the placement was best for the dog. My girls breeds are not ones I would have looked to, she falls into the category of bull breed and working dog mixes you mention. She seems to have had a very good set of young owners who took care that she was well socialised and cared for. She seems to be quite stable with a desire to communicate. Prices are insane. I don't blame sellers for asking the going price. I blame this idea that welfare issues will be cured by constricting breeders to some vague and un-definable 'best practice', rather than demonstration to inform better expectations for it. Form follows function. To set the form of a breeder 1st, is to limit their functional potential, their purpose and responsibilities (which are now 1st, to form or they can't exist) If I want to invent a washing machine I could say its form will fit in my pocket and sound like a opera, because that would be the best washing machine. There might be a lot of agreement on that. But its purpose is going to be severely limited with the technology available today and I would not be taking full responsibility for its purpose.

I have just done what I couldn't have imagined last year, and paid $700. for a mongrel. Not a designer breed. A mongrel- that might have sold as a pup last year for well under $500. So a BYB dog. I have no regrets(so far!) There was another buyer ready to take her sight unseen if I had decided against this 10 month old dog. I was looking for a pup, because many of the things I was looking for come down to training and socialisation in specific environments. This pup has had much of that good grounding done, with the added benefits that I can see what she looks like mature, even though shes not finished, and can judge the temperament traits much better. So I have here a very stable confident dog who doesn't seem to have any issues, works for a connection and communication. She is showing her frustration atm at being inside by ripping up a newspaper. Has already learned my furniture is off limits, but she has her own. Has gone from yesterday wanting to dive onto my free range chooks, to this morning happy to walk past them and look to within 6 feet. She is gently but very firmly putting Goose in his place for humping (she is just finishing her 1st season) People who want dogs will pay what they have to. I hope that prices don't stay so high in general that people who need dogs in their lives can't afford to have them there. That seems to be the case atm. Pedigree or cross doesn't come into it for most people. They have an idea of what they want weather thats well informed or not. I think a breeders responsibility is to have a well informed market because that tends to regulate itself. With expectation and demand.That includes welfare issues- because a well informed market will not support poor breeders with their purchase choices. You could say this dog I have was not bred to any standard or fore thought, is an accident. But she meets my standards when no breeder here came forward to say they could do the same. I would have supported that breeder with my choice. This may have been an accidental breeding-Or it could have been her breeder valued the traits this dog demonstrates above a breed standard that mentions them, but doesn't have any means to reward their demonstration where pedigrees are judged. @asal If I had been looking for a breed, rather than a dog with specific traits (a cattle dog) you'd have been the 1st breeder I contacted because what I have learned from you here is that I could trust you for comprehensive knowledge of your dogs and what you want of the pups you produce,and an honest assessment of suitability etc. That should be of value to any buyer. Well informed buyers will pay for that. Theres no reason they shouldn't, lots of reasons they should, because then your success is something to emulate.

Agreed. I mean that 'breed' status should be enough. Pure breed applies to closed registries only and shouldn't be the goal/end.

The sports themselves suffer for it. As does potential for canine ability. At least one of my dogs has been able to participate in working sports at the discretion of the organisers, as he was clearly of recognised working breeding. But I'm not sure how that worked. ( and out performed the pedigrees of his closest breed in the clubs 10 year history, while discounting some commonly held beliefs of working dogs in general, for those fields )

Oh, poor little mite, and you after the big improvements you won for her since shes been with you. Sending best of wishes for you both. Hoping that can be won back and this slight improvement is its start.

Run free and strong beautiful girl. Hugs to you and your family SarasMum. So sorry for your devastating loss.

Re-homes increasing already. Some appear to be just to take advantage of the inflated prices.

Yes. I can understand breed being open to interpretation, and that a Pedigree is just known parentage. But there is really only one meaning for 'pure'. Purity just doesn't apply for recognition as a breed out side of ANKC and other closed registries. And I would not like to see its use encouraged when its a dead end concept biologically, where diversity = responsibility. Purity is the antithesis of diversity.

I recently had a similar experience, it does seem there are a lot of people who have no idea what a pure bred dog even is. A woman telling me her pup was a 'pure breed rotty' with a huge white chest and white feet with a a very short staffy coat. Me; ' So why the short coat and white?' Lady; Oh i was told it was a throw back to the grandfather who was half Staffy". But its not a fault of the people, its a fault in the organisation and its qualification for membership identity. Education is not seen as a responsibility of membership, Its seen as a qualification of membership. Education is viewed as a responsibility to membership. Of the Pedigree breeders identity. Yet if that P B identity insists education beyond its own membership is not their responsibility, then it can only be left to other interests. Last time I looked, I noticed the A.N.K.C web site had taken out the statement that cross breeds were not recognised by that body. A start. But no where near enough to combat the 150 years plus that message has had had to 'fix' the idea. Refusing recognition of dogs outside of a pedigree registry body enforced a perspective on that body. Not false, but incomplete. Its going to take a lot more than the passive action of removing that statement to turn around what is happening. A process of identity selection was begun by enforcing a perspective. Thats not near enough to stop it at this late stage of its evolution.

Not sure how legit, but there was a litter advertised on trading post a few days ago. Good luck!

Its too easy to say "This is a problem, If we do/don't do X, we can avoid that problem. That doesn't tell you how the problems come to be in the 1st place, or how to solve them.

Yep. All valid points. But would not be having the same impact if breeding for pet markets and demands had been accepted from the start, and less push for regulation, more focus on showing people how to make it all work.If people understand the work involved and its purpose, they are less likely to over estimate their abilities to do it, or recognise where a seller has failed. The socialisation aspect would be a problem, but pedigrees would hold a higher percentage of the market, contain more diversity (and meet more diverse needs for that) and accessibility. It would be definitely. be more difficult to screen buyers !

And there will be people who see these prices, and think hey, easy money. Making it harder to breed, setting higher qualifications and financial costs, doesn't address issues of responsibility. It just changes the interpretation of 'responsibe' to some thing fewer are capable of, and fewer people can have any familiarity with. The 1st motive of a breeder isn't going to be dogs, If money and 'qualification' come 1st. And you have a population who are now so far from the experience they don't remember when or how these things were once their own responsibility to take or not. You only get less responsibility, by removing or with holding familiarity with the subject. Familiarity and recognition of conditions related to the subject are essential for responsibility.The qualifications we are setting up to be recognised as a breeder (and have been called for as owners ) only reduce familiarity and recognition of the conditions faced by breeders and owners. = less ability to respond to those.

A lot of it did. The pandemic has caused a lot of people to be home more. People who were once too busy to consider a dog are bored, insecure or lonely.Or want to keep their kids amused. The demand for dogs/pups has sky rocketed. It won't last. There are already a lot of re-homes coming up and there will be lot more, as well as unplanned litters. Sadly, being willing to pay huge prices is no guarantee of responsibility or appreciation. A lot of dogs in need coming up soon.

The usual mistake, I think, of targeting only effective to those who are already 'responsible'. I don't so much mind extra fees,in moderation, If for the dogs lifetime. Exemptions and reductions though are far too restrictive and specific for developmental potential of domestic Dogs.

Glad I am not looking there!