Sandy46

Oh dear, here we go again. Why does this pop up so often? People please, the original Rottweiler also known a hundred years ago as the farmers dog, the butchers dog etc was a much larger dog than our current show winners. For heavens sake go look at the history of the dog before you deride somebody. http://www.donnerbergrottweilers.com/rottweiler-history.html.'>http://www.donnerbergrottweilers.com/rottweiler-history.html. The breed was "discovered" and imported to England, for show the weight and height was standardized. Look it up. http://www.donnerbergrottweilers.com/rottweiler-history.html . Male 64 Kilo Female 56. The dog then traveled to America where it was bred and shown, the American standard looked for a dog of 48 kilo. Our modern show standard. There are still a few breeders in Europe breeding the original dogs as working dogs. The show standard has changed the breed to a more compact, less jowly and slobbery dog. At least rottweiler breeders have not gone the way of the new GSD breeders, better know lately as the German seal dog. These days Rottweilers are a slightly smaller more compact dog but still retaining all the good features and charisma of the old rottweilers. I would suggest first asking for a registered pedigree, then check out the dogs. Personally I would recommend going to an established breeder and getting a good strong healthy pup rather than buying a pig in a poke. You may be lucky and have found one of the working dog breeders. There are still a couple in Aust though they keep a low profile. I had those up until ten years ago but rarely bred them. Yes mine was an import and after the original dog passed on at 14 years I had his son for a further 12 years. I lost him when he was poisoned and we could not save him, not for want of trying. Those lines are not permitted in the show ring so if you intend showing forget it. Go to a registered show breeder.

I do not believe it is a major issue, but there are a few and we all know how much things are distorted by the media. The problem is that we shall all be tarred with the same brush so need to be prepared for it.

So having stated our requirements for potential owners, argued about Pure breed opposed to rescue, we have very effectively stuck our head in the sand and not really addressed the real issue. There is a concerted campaign out there to make show dog breeders and pure breeds look bad, we are accused of breeding for extremes so we get show quality, by our own admission we only get one or two "Show quality" pups from a litter. That is being used against us. As is the medical problems of some breeds. There is a very concerted campaign in the public face to turn the public towards "Designer dogs" They are quoting vet scientists who have made a study of genetics and DNA and can prove our pure breeds come from relatively small gene pools. ie King Charles, supposedly a gene pool of 6 dogs. While "Designer dogs" are healthy, strong dogs featuring the best of two breeds without the problems of either. The biggest problem is that there are some big commercial interests backing some of these puppy farms. They were the target for AR for a while and some of the smaller ones still are but the big commercial interests keep a low profile, have reasonable conditions and are going to be hard to get rid of. But they are quietly throwing lots of money at telling the public how wonderful they are. Money going into so called scientific research to get books published listing the bad points of pure breeds and advocating cross breeding to improve the dog. Look at John Bradshaws book Dog Sense. It is there it is subtle but it mentions it on a few occasions. Slowly but surely it will erode our position as "Setting the Standard" to the point where we are the bad guys. More and more we are becoming a target, do not think that you are immune to a few AR people sneaking onto your property and taking video of your dogs. Many of them are well intentioned fanatics, easily pumped up to believe what they are told and as we have seen recently only one bad thing on Utube is enough to case a lot of grief to people. AR exists on donations, if you think that certain commercial interests don't donate then you live in an ideal world. Defending our position to breed show dogs is fine, but perhaps we need to use some of mother natures throw backs to remedy some of the problems we have made for ourselves. At least that way we retain the line. But to do that we need to alter the standards a little. After the hoorah about "Jugs" I went and approached a pug breeder I know and asked, yes she has had a few "pet quality" dogs with less prominent eyes and longer nose. She is not proud of them but very proud of their litter sister who has taken out a few show. That may be mission impossible to change that attitude. It does appear to be a fairly common mind set. I have no doubt that some of the key board trolls on this list will now have a field day but if only a few of you think about the problem then it may not be too late for us to not end up being victims.

There is good, there is bad and there is the original problem. Lets not play the blame game. I know quite a few breeders and even the ones with the short straw when it comes to dogs with problems are concerned and careful breeders and care about their dogs and their dogs health and well being. Cannot say the same for puppy farm. The three I have run across don't seem to care much about the dogs well being. But all that is another matter. We are facing a problem that started with a small gene pool, that applies to a number of breeds, certain features were judged to be good and many started breeding for those features, a somewhat gradual progression to accent those features more and more. Now we have a couple of breeds leading the field, we can perhaps avoid following that trend with the rest but first we need to accept the problem is there, then use our collective knowledge and experience to try to remedy the problem before those fanatics from AR or the keyboard trolls stop us entirely. We are at a point in time where we cannot let personal preference or bias rule. There is a wealth of know how on this forum, lets apply it before the fanatics turn the general public against us. Lets just for once get constructive and leave attitudes and blame out and see what the hell we can do to slowly repair the problem. Vets and other members of the scientific community are telling us we have inherited a problem and some of our dogs are suffering because of it. Lets ensure it stays a minority of breeds and see what we can do to repair many generations of error. It is not about show or work dogs it is about our integrity in the community. When keyboard trolls and fanatics start posting this sort of thing on facebook, twitter and Utube we as a community have a problem. We are the best placed to fix it. It will take concerted action and will require attitudes be left on the shelf. So anybody with any ideas on how best to do this. Lobby for changes and slowly bring the dogs back to a healthy standard? Not all the radical modifications are unhealthy but some certainly are, lets identify the problem and see what we can do it fix it. Some people blame the standard, others blame international trends, well blaming perhaps makes them feel better but not too many will argue for changes to the standard. Perhaps that is where we need to start. Draw back a bit from the more radical. Slowly get back to where we were 20 or 30 years ago, keep the good and repair the bad.

A person with a life who does not attack occasional poster.

No need to put it in the public forum that is where it came from. It is all over Facebook, etc.. Yes I spend more time reading here than posting here, so that makes me what?

First I am not a she, second I am not into AR or any other extreme body, third this is not my first post. I have been training, showing, trialing and breeding dogs for more than 50 years. So please do not jump to conclusions. I have seen the world of dog breeding and showing change quite a lot over many years. Careful, thoughtful breeding provided us with many excellent dogs and some breeds have benefited a lot from the care that has been lavished on them. As I stated in a previous post the video is low budget, poor quality and not too great all round but it does show some radical changes in a few breeds, changes that are probably not the best for the breed. Some of the early breeds of long hair dogs certainly were clipped for work, the coats being long for winter. But we also tend to show a number of dogs when they are in full coat and not when "Blown" To the inexperienced that does show a certain standard and mindset and judges will not approve of blown coats. It is so easy to criticize for this of for that. There was no attack on breeders intended, nor was it about animal rights. It was a question about where are we going with our breeding programs, are we improving the dogs or are we perpetuating the pretty and making dogs less functional. Are we perpetuating faults because they are admired and judged to be good perhaps? Are we too quick to accept modification of a dogs standard because it is what is being done or accepted by judges? It was intended as a question, not an attack. Over the years we have changed so much for the better of our dogs. cropping, docking, cruelty laws etc. As a community we can take pride in our achievements and our standards, the question is though are we allowing selective breeding in a very few instances that may not be best for those dogs. That is what I gleaned from that video. Nothing more, nothing as radical as that wild accusation and defense. Which was totally uncalled for as there was no attack on anybody here, this is an international thing not us.

Perhaps I should have been a bit more specific, I know of a number of show dogs whose litter mates are working dogs or obedience trial competitors or agility competitors, Good solid well bred dogs. Not every dog in a litter is top show quality, so some end up doing other things, it happens. Some even end up as just pampered pets, I did not mean one dog would do the lot, though I do know a dairy farmer neighbor whose kelpie had it's own bedroom complete with brass bed, aircon and automatic door, because it was a potential show champion as a puppy. LOL. He said he needed to look after his quality working dog. I suppose the real question here is how many breeds have been modified to an extreme that is not good for the dog and can anything at all be done to reverse that. I don't think so. Their owners are defensive about them and anybody who dares to say anything about the breed is a moron with no idea or knowledge of the breed. Some things can be changed and have been, like docking and cropping but actual breeding to accent a feature, good or bad, is a different thing. I do believe a dog that looks like one of Picaso's paintings is a bit wrong. We are not there yet, not really but where will it end? Oh dear what a horrible thought. LOL

The video is a bit over done and looks very low budget but I think it was intended to make people look at the extreme and think, not about the working dog / show dog so much. Collies, Shelties,Kelpies even English sheep dogs are little changed and when not fluffed up and groomed for show look pretty much the same as they always have. There have been changes with selective breeding to make some dogs a bit prettier, I do not have a problem with that. Even the hairy Afghans are fit and healthy and able to run, The ones that make me think are the extremes. Not the ones that have winter coat for show etc. When a breeder spends $60,000.00 importing a champion stud dog and then the dog cannot service a bitch but needs to be an IF. job, then I start to worry, when told that if I buy a puppy I must ensure I not walk it more than 200 meters without a rest,but that was only one of two extremes I have run across in a long life of association with dogs. Watching the video I begin to wonder what the hell have we done to some of our dogs. Not all, just some. But you may be right in the comment about open ended standards that are open to interpretation. Whatever the reason if it breeds dogs that are unhealthy it is a problem. It is not about which dog can heard sheep, even back yard kelpies can be trained to do that probably not as well as those trained to work from pups, but well enough to be called a herd dog. LOL though probably only on a hobby farm. But the instinct is there so with training it is possible. Kelpies are not a great example because there are so many that are both show and trial but that too is true of many breeds. Some people show, some people trial and some people just farm cattle and sheep.

Most show dogs are very good examples of the breed, better groomed and polished for a show but essentially the same as the working dogs, a few others have gone overboard, no animal rights or anything involved in telling the truth. No need for a shit fight either.

Food for thought. http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=4740350801155&set=vb.172165819526605&type=2&theater

Dogs operate and communicate mainly via body language, sights hounds are especially sensitive to stance, a male will often raise himself to full height and put his shoulders back and make direct eye contact when confronting a dog he does not know or like, this may have been the case with your neighbor he may have inadvertently shown a stance the dog saw as aggressive, the dog will then react defensively by warning with a bark, if the dog is small and young then the other reactions by him fit. Since there is no problem at training then there is a good chance that it was either a body language (stance ) problem or a challenge to fight ( eye contact ) that caused the reaction. If the two incidents happened close together there may have been a carryover from the first to the second. Fear reactions have causes it is a matter of finding what the cause is, dogs actually pay more attention to stance than to small changes like beanies, beards or glasses. Flapping coats may cause a fear reaction but most people usually remove coats when they come into a house so I am guessing that is not the cause. If your uncle turns his back to the dog and does not make eye contact the dog will most likely check him out and seeing no threat return to accepting treats.