'building Better Dogs' Seminar 11 Feb 2010

[poodlefan]

The only reason I think she does it is to prevent breeding in competition to her.

Could be as she was quite honest that she is breeding for profit. However she is also well aware that F2s are problematic.

Cat breeders routinely desex kittens before sale. Do you have a problem with that?

You really need to see the full transcript of what the various speakers said before you pass judgement. I will say here I was quite confronted by what some of the speakers said, particularly Kate, but each made some good and valid points (imho).

I don't know anything about the health impact of early desexing of kittens so I don't have an opinion on it.

I think Dr Schofeld has a hide like a rhino for even opening her mouth on the subject of responsible dog breeding. She breeds together two breeds that suffer from genetically identical forms of PRA and thinks that hybrid vigour will prevent problems. Oh pleeeze.

I've never seen anyone move so fast to silence a puppy buyer on her forum when he posted that the pup he'd bought from her had developed HD.

[WreckitWhippet]

I don't think we need to look at "building better dogs " at all. We need to continue to produce dogs that are typey, have excellent temperaments ( as per the breed standard requirements ), and are sound.

We certainly need better owners on the whole, because no watered down, altered version of any of the current breeds, is going to suit the lazy, uneducated, incompetent, want it now and dump it later , type that exists today.

It wouldn't matter if the Beagle was less sniffy, the Whippet had no prey drive or the Stafford suddenly took a hammering from any dog it came across, because the less than suitable owners will still exist and would manage to stuff it up , no matter what you gave or sold them.

[huski]

Yet the "forprofit" cross-breeders are selecting for temperament over looks, while purebreed breeders may well put looks first.

Funny, you say like that it's a fact rather than your opinion. You can back it up with...?

[WoofnHoof]

Also, anyone who doesn't research a breed and find out exactly what that means shouldn't have a dog.

I didn't research my breed, should I not have a dog?

Perhaps if you had, you'd not be saying things like this:

Personally, living alone and having a few things on the go it can be difficult to keep up with the sheer amount of exercise and stimulation my boy needs to have to keep him occupied, it wouldn't hurt to have a dog who could cope with a few days off without trashing the house out of boredom. It's not like he doesn't get a lot of interaction, it's just that some days it's not enough for him. Just because I can deal with the consequences of a few days of boredom doesn't mean it's the ideal situation for a breed which is largely unchanged since it's sledding days.

Good on you for rising to the challenge but you know better than most the reason why Huskies end up in pounds. If you don't want a dog that climbs the walls if it misses a day of exercise, don't buy a Husky next time. If you'd bought from a good breeder, you'd have been informed about what owning one entails.

But then I wouldn't have my dog who I love more than anything, my life would be so much poorer without my sibe. His life wouldn't be any less fulfilling if he were less inclined to trash stuff after a day off, if I break my leg and can't walk him don't you think it would be better if he weren't so highly driven? My next dog probably wont be a sibe because I want to see what it's like to have recall lol, but I would never rule out getting another one later on. There is a lot more to a sibe than just high energy levels, there are people here who have lower energy sibes, how is it bad to breed towards that?

Also, anyone who doesn't research a breed and find out exactly what that means shouldn't have a dog.

I didn't research my breed, should I not have a dog?

Surely you don't recommend people just get any dog they like the look of, regardless of whether their choice means the dog may be discarded in the pound because it is unsuitable for their circumstances.

No I don't recommend that, but that doesn't mean that I don't think tweaking the working drive of some breeds would be beneficial to the future of the breed and the individual dogs in the long term.

[KismetKat]

Says who? Kate? Where's her evidence? She can no more predict the temperament in her dogs than she can their coat type.

A purebred dog that does not conform to the temperament requirements of its breed standard is not a good example of the breed.

Currently there is no scientifically proven test for an amicable temperment, however if you have an adult dog who is amicable and mate it with another adult dog who is amicable, I would guess you would mainly get amicable puppies. In regards to coat, I think it was Kate who said the F1 poodle crosses will have a poodle coat (tho with some shedding). I have NO idea why an F1 cross of a lav and poodle should always end up with a poodle coat - I will take that claim with a grain of salt.

and back to breed standards - u mention that if they don't have the characteristics cited then they are not a good example. Can I quote the Boxer breed standard

The character of the Boxer is of the greatest importance and demands the most careful attention. He is renowned from olden times for his great love and faithfulness to his master and household, his alertness, and fearless courage as a defender and protector. The Boxer is docile but distrustful of strangers. He is bright and friendly in play but brave and determined when roused. His intelligence and willing tractability, his modesty, and cleanliness make him a highly desirable family dog and cheerful companion. He is the soul of honesty and loyalty. He is never false or treacherous even in his old age.

I train with a Boxer group and I don't see any of them exhibiiting some aspects of this standard unless you add to the line " distrustful of strangers" "distrustful of dogs with noses longer than my own" and to this line "brave and determined when roused" "and any long-nosed dog will 'rouse' me".

[huski]

But then I wouldn't have my dog who I love more than anything, my life would be so much poorer without my sibe. His life wouldn't be any less fulfilling if he were less inclined to trash stuff after a day off, if I break my leg and can't walk him don't you think it would be better if he weren't so highly driven? My next dog probably wont be a sibe because I want to see what it's like to have recall lol, but I would never rule out getting another one later on. There is a lot more to a sibe than just high energy levels, there are people here who have lower energy sibes, how is it bad to breed towards that?

Are you seriously saying that we should breed any working drive out of our dogs in case you break your leg?

Right, of course, stuff having dogs that fit the breed standard or can do what they were bred to do as long as it makes it easier for Joe Blow to live with

[Are You Serious Jo]

Sounds like you are promoting crossbreeding. Do you remember you are on a site that exists for the promotion of purebred dogs?

[poodlefan]

Kismetkat:

Currently there is no scientifically proven test for an amicable temperment, however if you have an adult dog who is amicable and mate it with another adult dog who is amicable, I would guess you would mainly get amicable puppies. In regards to coat, I think it was Kate who said the F1 poodle crosses will have a poodle coat (tho with some shedding). I have NO idea why an F1 cross of a lav and poodle should always end up with a poodle coat - I will take that claim with a grain of salt.

That discounts the impact of socialisation and training. But yes, temperament of the parents is usually a reliable indicator of temperament in the pups.

Kate's changed her tune Her website says that 70% of her dogs shed to some degree. Most of them have nothing like poodle coat - they are shaggy, not

woolly. I quote.

My Labradoodles are all shaggy dogs. Their coats vary in thickness, texture, length and degree of wave or curl. They have a range of coat types ranging from short thin coarse hairy coats that are very easy care through to very thick long curly coats which are virtually identical to poodle coats and require regular clipping.

These characteristics of the coat seem to be independently segregating – i.e. the coats can be: soft short, thick and curly, very soft, long, thin and straight, soft, thick, long and wavy, coarse, ……… etc, etc. In fact the way we have described them there could be 68 different coat combinations and when you see 30 or 40 dogs at a picnic it is clear that very few dogs have exactly the same coat type.

With regard to shedding about 70% are low or moderate shedders, 10% of dogs are non-shedding and the remaining 20% shed a lot (some as much as a Labrador it seems).

What she fails to tell her puppy buyers is that many of these dogs coats are a nightmare to maintain. Ask any groomer.

[KismetKat]

Yet the "forprofit" cross-breeders are selecting for temperament over looks, while purebreed breeders may well put looks first.

Funny, you say like that it's a fact rather than your opinion. You can back it up with...?

Huski - I am reporting on what I understood from what was said at the seminar today. Please dont confuse these statements with my own opinion. Kate was talking about her "pet breeder" code of ethics and in the context of what she said the 6 points of the code were, plus what was being said about behaviours, these are my own interpretations (but only as they would apply to signatories of Kate's code of ethics).

[Diva]

You really need to see the full transcript of what the various speakers said before you pass judgement. I will say here I was quite confronted by what some of the speakers said, particularly Kate, but each made some good and valid points (imho).

I'm not passing judgement on the speakers. But I sure am on what you are posting. Making statements as fact that are pure assertion, or just purely wrong.

Maybe you are reiterating what was presented at the seminar. Perhaps you aren't. Either way its been very, um, let's just leave it at disappointingly illogical and demonstrably ill-informed.

[Cosmolo]

Why should we change dogs to compensate for some human issues? In changing drive you change other things too. I posted a thread on staffords once and got some very interesting replies when i posed the question about breeding away from dog aggression and 'gameness'. It was a great thread which gave good examples of how chaging one characteristic can accidentally change another that you do not want changed.

Watered down working dogs are often NOT easier to train eitehr- that is complete fallacy. Water down the dogs drive and incidentally affect the dogs nerve and the resulting dog is going to have weaker nerves and lower drive not able to overcome such nerves. These dogs are not 'easier'.

[KismetKat]

Kate's changed her tune Her website says that 70% of her dogs shed to some degree. Most of them have nothing like poodle coat - they are shaggy, not

woolly. I quote.

At the seminar she clearly stated her dogs DO shed. I took her statement about poodle type coats to mean that they "looked" poodle like (and certainly the photos showed dogs with curly poodle coats). Her original purpose was to breed shaggy dogs like a lovely mutt she owned.

[WoofnHoof]

How do you work out which gene in the Siberian Husky produces dogs that are excellent escape artists, and how do you selectively breed away from this without buggering up the breed entirely?

Do you honestly think that the majority of Sibes in pounds and rescues come from reputable breeders? I don't - surely you realise that changing the breed in the way you propose will take decades, if it is even possible, what do we do about the dogs that are dumped in the mean time? Do you seriously think the problem is the dogs, and not the people who are buying and breeding them?

My sibe came from a byb but he's every inch a sibe, when I did start reading up on sibes it was like they were talking about my dog personally I never said the problem is the dogs, I'm saying it's a combination of less work for working dogs and a different environment they have to live in than the one they were bred for. It would take a longer time to filter through but don't you think that if someone less prepared for the extreme aspects of sibe characteristcs were to buy a sibe it would be better to offer them one which was not so challenging?

But what about all the Siberians in homes world wide whose owners love the breed the way it is, those of which the breed suits well? I wouldn't change anything about my Siberian. If the breed was too active for me, then I would learn from the experience and next time would buy a breed that does suit my lifestyle.

Isn't it far simpler to encourage people to buy breeds that suit them rather than try to change the inherent nature of the breed itself? What's a Siberian Husky if he's not an active dog that needs a reasonable amount of physical and mental stimulation - they are not a coach potato breed, why you would want to breed one who is, is beyond me, for the same reason I cannot fathom why anyone would breed a beagle who didn't want to scent.

Like I said before, I love my sibe and I have never regretted getting him, I may get another down the track but just because I love my boy doesn't mean I think their traits are 100% suitable for modern life and the majority of the homes they find themselves in. It's not like the dogs themselves really care how well they represent the breed standard, only humans care about that.

[poodlefan]

WnH:

It would take a longer time to filter through but don't you think that if someone less prepared for the extreme aspects of sibe characteristcs were to buy a sibe it would be better to offer them one which was not so challenging?

There are already less challenging Spitz breeds around. If you don't want to deal with Sibe personality, buy an Elkhound or a Lapphund.

Or go to a breeder that knows their dogs backwards and ask them to select you a less full on pup. Or get a more layback adult.

Edited February 11, 2010 by poodlefan

[Kissindra]

ah the signitories to Kate's code of ethics - those who list on their website that they are "proud to be a AAPDB breeder"....the same ones happily discussing lying to registered breeders and people rehoming dogs to get breeding stock, one of whom rehomed a 6 year old Cavalier grossly overweight and with an advanced case of MVD which was not disclosed to the new home and believes(or at least advertises) utterly that crossbreeding solves all health concerns! I'm trying to keep in mind that rotten apples should not necessarily spoil the whole bunch and that it IS possible for things to progress beyond their starting point, but I am going to take significant convincing that this is a group of people with ethics I could mostly agree with.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Kissindra

[Are You Serious Jo]

Kate must have one bloody good spiel for someone attending one seminar only to now believe that puppy farms are the bees knees.

[WreckitWhippet]

Why should we change dogs to compensate for some human issues? In changing drive you change other things too. I posted a thread on staffords once and got some very interesting replies when i posed the question about breeding away from dog aggression and 'gameness'. It was a great thread which gave good examples of how chaging one characteristic can accidentally change another that you do not want changed.

Watered down working dogs are often NOT easier to train eitehr- that is complete fallacy. Water down the dogs drive and incidentally affect the dogs nerve and the resulting dog is going to have weaker nerves and lower drive not able to overcome such nerves. These dogs are not 'easier'.

I for one am a firm believer that that tenacity and boldness, goes hand in hand with him being totally reliable and is what makes him the "nanny dog".

[KismetKat]

You really need to see the full transcript of what the various speakers said before you pass judgement. I will say here I was quite confronted by what some of the speakers said, particularly Kate, but each made some good and valid points (imho).

I'm not passing judgement on the speakers. But I sure am on what you are posting. Making statements as fact that are pure assertion, or just purely wrong.

Maybe you are reiterating what was presented at the seminar. Perhaps you aren't. Either way its been very, um, let's just leave it at disappointingly illogical and demonstrably ill-informed.

Then don't read my posts of my impressions of what was said, then be patient and wait for the DVD release to get your own impressions.

as for Cosmolo who wrote "Why should we change dogs to compensate for some human issues?" - I suspect the answer there is "because they always have". The argument was made we have created dogs to suit our needs, but our needs have changed.

and on that note I will go to bed. If you weren't there, then watch the video as it is available. Make up your own minds. These people are, imho, not anti-dog breeds at all, they are pro dog.

[WoofnHoof]

But then I wouldn't have my dog who I love more than anything, my life would be so much poorer without my sibe. His life wouldn't be any less fulfilling if he were less inclined to trash stuff after a day off, if I break my leg and can't walk him don't you think it would be better if he weren't so highly driven? My next dog probably wont be a sibe because I want to see what it's like to have recall lol, but I would never rule out getting another one later on. There is a lot more to a sibe than just high energy levels, there are people here who have lower energy sibes, how is it bad to breed towards that?

Are you seriously saying that we should breed any working drive out of our dogs in case you break your leg?

Right, of course, stuff having dogs that fit the breed standard or can do what they were bred to do as long as it makes it easier for Joe Blow to live with

What were they bred to do huski? They were bred to pull sleds in the arctic, they were bred to go for hundreds of kilometers, they were bred to be self-sufficient. None of these traits are relevant today, lowering drive does not equal eliminating drive completely. You don't need to reinvent the wheel you just select for dogs with slightly more easy going temperaments.

Sounds like you are promoting crossbreeding. Do you remember you are on a site that exists for the promotion of purebred dogs?

Not sure if you are referring to my posts but I'm talking about selecting for milder working drives within breeds, not outside of them.

[WoofnHoof]

WnH:

It would take a longer time to filter through but don't you think that if someone less prepared for the extreme aspects of sibe characteristcs were to buy a sibe it would be better to offer them one which was not so challenging?

There are already less challenging Spitz breeds around. If you don't want to deal with Sibe personality, buy an Elkhound or a Lapphund.

Or go to a breeder that knows their dogs backwards and ask them to select you a less full on pup. Or get a more layback adult.

That's the thing, I like sibes, I don't want any other spitz. I don't know how many pups in a litter of traditionally bred sibes would be 'less full on' I guess that is what I am saying, it might be more useful to encourage breeding to favour the less full on type which may be less likely to end up in pounds?