Staranais

I think these dogs are bred for work, not sport - I don't think they have dogsport titles. I suspect if you contacted the breeders, they wouldn't be terribly happy with these dogs being sold as pets. They may be describing their dogs incorrectly as civil & sharp, but they seem to be pretty knowledgeable men. Of course, even really knowledgeable trainers can't necessarily agree on the definition or desirability of terms like "defense" or "suspicion" or "fight drive" - there's just been a huge debate between some very experienced trainers & breeders about that very subject over on the specialist canines forum in the last few days. I don't know if you're a member, but it made very interesting reading (once you got past the personal attacks, as on most forums!)

The sire is described by the owners on their webpage as dominant & civil aggressive, the dam is described as sharp and civil, and the breeders say they're breeding for a hard dog suited for security & police work. That's just not necessarily an ideal companion animal for 99% of the public, I'd think. Probably an amazing animal in the right hands.

Hmmm, I don't know. I can see your point, and agree that breeders shouldn't advertise their dogs as out-of-control landsharks, but I also don't think euphemisms really do the breed any good either. Even saying "not for the faint hearted" doesn't really give the same picture as saying "these dogs are not good pets, you will need to keep 100% control at all times if you don't want them to bite people" (not sure if these dogs are in this class - and not all working lines are like that by any means - but some working dog lines are not at all social). But hey, each to their own.

I don't know, I'd rather they were honest about what type of dogs they were selling, lots of problems can come from placing working dogs into homes that don't suit them. What would you have used as a synonym for "aggression"? If these are civil security line GSD, then I can't think of many ways of saying the same thing but still being clear & honest about what the dogs are capable of.

Perhaps they are being responsible & honest, and trying to make clear that these are working dogs, suitable for police or security work or bitesports, and not suitable as pets? As far as I'm aware, many working dog people want their dog to have more than just good (prey) drive - prey drive is necessary, but not sufficient, for some working dogs.

Oh hmmm oh well, twas just a thought. Tee hee, I think my girl would love absolutely anything that involved running, jumping, and biting stuff. We have other fish to fry first though.

The dog heels more nicely in the obedience portion of the trial, which is also on Youtube. I'm not sure how badly slightly sloppy heeling is supposed to be penalised in the protection section anyway? It would be cooler if she'd trained it too, though.

Show dogs are supposed to focus up ahead & they're allowed to pull on the leash, right? So could you teach her to pull towards a target off in the distance? My girl does this off a leash as the start of a send away, I hold her back & work her up then release her to run & pounce on her target, then she gets marked as soon as her feet hit it. Eventually I'll put the target further & further away until she can't see it anymore but learns it is always in the direction I have pointed. Could you do a similar thing with your girl, only on leash, getting her to focus on & pull towards a target? Just a thought, may not work at all since I know very little about how a dog is supposed to move for conformation shows?

I think Jeanne is training for conformation shows, where the dog is supposed to look ahead not up?

no one more BYB who can't be bothered doing it properly And now she won't ever be. Well done. well as you believe every word she said you should also believe she was only ever going to have the one litter. Why would I start a conversation assuming the other person is lying? I mean, it makes no sense to me to do that. All I know is that I don't bother referring people to DOL anymore unless they're already registered dog converts. If they're not, then the reception they get on DOL won't persuade them to change their views, it will only reinforce any prejudices they already have against registered breeders. And I think that is sad. I think the Australian registered dog community are losing a huge opportunity to influence the people who are able to be influenced, by assuming that every non registered breeder or puppy buyer who visits this site has malicious intent & deserves to be roasted. That's all I have to say about it.

no one more BYB who can't be bothered doing it properly And now she won't ever be. Well done.

Oh great, there she goes while I was posting. One more person who thinks registered breeders are elitist snobs. What happened to the saying, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar?

She didn't actually say the xrays weren't sent in, did she? Perhaps they were. I am happy to see people making an attempt to breed responsibly. Obviously it would be great if every dog breeder did everything 100% right. But even registered breeders don't always x-ray their breeding stock, there was a thread about it earlier today. Perhaps if Kezzie breeds again she will do so after becoming a registered breeder. That is, if we don't put her off the idea of associating with registered breeders by publicly shaming her off the forum.

Yes. I am an ex vet nurse, and the vet where I used to work x-rayed both dogs for me. Hooray, that makes me happy to hear. Stick around a bit and learn why becoming a registered breeder if you ever plan to breed again would be even better.

Vet checks including hip and elbow x-rays? Not trying to be a bully, but these diseases are rampant in Labradors, and it's only by breeders being very conscientious & x-raying all their breeding stock (even those dogs that look "normal") that it will ever be stamped out.

Or perhaps some just don't care? I am thinking that perhaps people assumed you're not a registered breeder since you don't specifically say you are. Unregistered breeders tend to get a very chilly reception around here, for numerous reasons including the fact that they tend not to health test their dogs for common genetic conditions before breeding. I hope you did! They are very cute babies, and the mum is pretty - good luck with them.

So, if they happened to have a ringsport title first, they would have to go backwards and do a Schutzhund one. But they all tend to do schutzhund first even if they plan to try their hand at ring later, so it isn't often an issue. Gotcha!

Not really, cos that was the point of my comment - do they also need to go and do a Sch title if they happened to have already achieved a ringsport one? Seems like overkill. And I would imagine probably difficult to retrain a dog to bite schutzhund style once they're used to biting ringsport style.

It also pops up because there are many genes contributing to the formation & growth of a hip joint, and we can't directly test for or eliminate each undesirable allele. If we could, there would be no need to radiograph. Yes. Even if you could test for all genes contributing to the formation & growth of a hip joint, would you still exclude a dog from breeding program based on such results? Me? I'm no breeder, Lilli. But if I were in that situation, then if the dog had absolutely crappy hips, if almost every gene related to hip quality was bad, then yes I would most likely exclude it from the program. If it had moderate hips, I'd keep it if it were a dog with other qualities I really wanted - and cross it with a dog with different set of bad alleles, so the pups wouldn't have clinically evident dysplasia. If it had great hips, I wouldn't exclude it from the breeding program on the basis of its hips. Heck, if it had amazing hips, I might breed it just to grab those good alleles into my lines - although of course there is a lot, lot more to a dog than its hips. :rolleyes: It seems a pity to me to have to pick, although I know it is necessary to some degree in all breeds. But my main point is, you don't really know how good hips are if you don't x-ray, so you can't make a fully informed choice. Sure, you can pick the dogs with really crappy hips (they show clinical signs!) But you can't tell the borderline hips from the good ones from the excellent ones based on performance - they all just look normal. It's the same problem they're having in NZ huntaways now. Great dogs, bred purely for working ability for the last few hundred years by people who (by and large) breed pretty carefully for a dog that can work all day, you'd think they'd have damn good hips. A recent survey of farmers has just shown that there is a considerable problem with hip dysplasia (among other things) turning up in the breed. Would better pedigree keeping have helped? I bet it would! But I also think x-rays would have done a lot as well. I've rambled too long - sorry OP - this isn't really on topic for you (unless you choose to breed at some point, I guess!) I agree with Lilli that doing pedigree research will be very, very helpful to someone in your situation. It just also makes me cranky that the breeders in Aussie & NZ aren't using all available tools out there to ensure they're producing healthy pups.

And, now I think about it, how about the dogs that hold French & Belgian Ring titles? Do they ALSO need to get a SchH to be eligible for breeding under the FCI system? That seems a bit harsh.

It also pops up because there are many genes contributing to the formation & growth of a hip joint, and we can't directly test for or eliminate each undesirable allele. If we could, there would be no need to radiograph. You're very right, hip scores and elbow scores are not the be all and end all of a good dog, or even of a good hip. But the fact that some breeders pay too much attention to hip and elbow scores is no reason not to score dogs at all. Even if you still choose to breed a dog with only moderately good hips because it is a fantastic dog in other ways, at least you can choose to breed it to a dog with great hips, as proven by performance and radiographs. I can not think of one single good reason not to hip and elbow score a breeding dog from a large breed that sometimes shows ED or HD.

I don't believe there's any reason not to score for ED and HD in a large breed, especially not a large breed where HD or ED are known to exist. It's not a simple monogenetic condition where if it's out of your lines then it's permanently gone. Puppies can't be clear of HD or ED by parentage. It can pop up after lines have been apparently normal for generations. Sure, if the parents and grandparents and siblings never got HD then the chances of your dog getting it are lower than if some of them were overtly dysplastic. But dogs can have borderline hips and still look phenotypically normal. Breed two dogs with borderline hips together, and chances are you'll get some puppies with dyplasia. Why take the risk? X-rays aren't that expensive to do, not compared to all the other expenses of raising pedigree puppies.

Whether that is a myth depends on the dog, and the owner, I think. My girl sleeps on the bed with me with no issues at all & she is definitely no pushover. But we've done a lot of other work outside the bedroom (LOL!) to establish that I'm the head honcho.

The more I think about this, the crankier it makes me. How are people supposed to convince the general public that buying from a purebred breeders is safer & better than buying from a BYB when some registered breeders neither test their breeding stock for genetic disease, nor offer a health guarantee against genetic disease? Sorry to hijack your thread a little, just wanted to express my crankiness at your situation. :rolleyes:

Tee hee, we will find out anyway when you get your pup and post photos! I imported my current girl, but only between NZ and Oz, where there is no quarantine. It was expensive but I don't regret it. On the other hand I would not have wanted to import her if she had required quarantine. Those first few months are so important for socialisation & bonding, especially for a performance/competition animal, I would not want my dog to spend them in a quarantine facility. If you were getting an older pup (6 months up), then I think it would be a more reasonable option. If the breeders are not testing for genetic disease and will also not give a health guarantee that the pup is free from genetic disease, then I'd say that says a lot about their own confidence in their stock being genetically healthy. If they were sure their lines were clean of genetic disease, they'd have no problem offering a guarantee. If they're not sure their lines are healthy, then IMO they should be testing. Doesn't sound very reputable to me.