Look What They Have Done To Our Dogs.

[rebelsquest]

Agree with Alyosha except I think she meant subjective not objective. Plus using greyhounds as an example of modern breeding that is not in trouble is wishful thinking at best. I'm speaking here not of show greyhounds but of the allegedly functional track greyhounds - some are bred well, many are bred just for speed and speed alone is not necessarily functional.

I agree that we need to hold our own to account where things have gone too far. In most of the groups there is a breed that needs to get its shit together. The fact that there are 30 other breeds in the group that are fine is usually overlooked tho'.

Provide some stats that suggest careless breeding (like.. 30% of show greyhounds carrying the gene for neuropathy- not being alive after 12 months definitely impacts on function) and then perhaps you'd have a valid argument. If being willing/able to chase well is not the breed's function, then I'm afraid I'm a little confused about what they're intended for. A dog needs to have drive, they need to have the ability to see that drive through. They are a hunting dog- see it, chase it, grab it. The vast majority of (racing bred) greyhounds I've dealt with have had sufficient drive and ability to do what they were intended for. Those that don't are not bred from.

To be blunt here, this argument makes me distrustful of people who breed for show. If they are unwilling to admit (when it is painfully obvious) that they need to go back several steps to address some major issues, then they are either unable to look objectively at their breed (in which case, they shouldn't be breeding) or they are knowingly ignoring the issues (in which case, they shouldn't be breeding).

I've asked before where you get your stats about greyhound neuropathy and you nver answered. I am asking again. Where do you get your information from? Greyhounds are tested before being bred or cleared by parentage. Not a single breeder of show greyhounds I know is ignoring neuropathy.

Unlike the racing industry which will breed anything to anything in pursuit of the next big winner. I.E they don't care if the dog is blind by 7 from pannus, as long as it wins. Or the ones that suffer from arthritis by 5 because they were poorly conformed but they had the heart to run through the pain barrier, again and again. Not to mention the thousands detroyed before they get to the race track becuase they don't break in well enough or fast enough.

Plus one to Rebanne's post. HA, you quoted these stats in a previous thread, were asked multiple times to provide a source, and either couldn't or chose not to.

Please either provide a source, or stop throwing around incorrect stats.

In Australia, the quoted figures are certainly incorrect.

[moosmum]

most whingers have no appreciation or understanding of what a working dog is, or how suburb house rearing differs to working rural rearing. they make comments ohhh ahh look at the difference, yet most of them could not handle, contain, or live with a working minded dog. yes there are differences and tweaks, big woop. Own what you like and keep it at that. Pet dogs change from their working counterparts because the pet home is not equipped for anything more. it's not a slight on the pet home, but reality of 21st century. look what they have done, look what we all have done. And hold off on the whinge. Because unless you breed or rear and deal with the public pet sector and legislators maybe it's not as simple as you write it should be :) Cheers hope everyone is enjoying their day of digest :) I'd be digesting more but one of the critters ate my guylian tray of chocolates! bah lucky I still have the chrissy cookies for my cuppa! :D

Agree. Look what we all have done.

We can winge forever about what "they" have done to our dogs,but its "we" who keep doing it and will keep on doing it while its all we know.Its an age of specialisation, information bombardment,and little time.No wonder we all get side tracked into little cliques,and make mistakes because we can't see the bigger picture.

I'd guess that when registries were formed there was a huge amount of variety even within the breeds,and the standards were written to provide a common goal,true to the breeds purpose and history.

Showing and pedigrees proved to be an extemely efficient method of improvement.Visibly,the standards were reached long ago and its become a matter of degrees,or fashion in SOME cases.Ditto where a breeds original function has been lost.

I doubt the founders of the breed clubs could have forseen how the world was going to change to lock us all into little cliques who only know our own speciality.The breed clubs didn't bring that about,and it didn't just happen to them. But blaming each other for problems keeps us there.

We are never all going to have the same priorities if we focus on the finer details within our own area of expertise,or deny the validity of any other.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Agree with Alyosha except I think she meant subjective not objective. Plus using greyhounds as an example of modern breeding that is not in trouble is wishful thinking at best. I'm speaking here not of show greyhounds but of the allegedly functional track greyhounds - some are bred well, many are bred just for speed and speed alone is not necessarily functional.

I agree that we need to hold our own to account where things have gone too far. In most of the groups there is a breed that needs to get its shit together. The fact that there are 30 other breeds in the group that are fine is usually overlooked tho'.

Provide some stats that suggest careless breeding (like.. 30% of show greyhounds carrying the gene for neuropathy- not being alive after 12 months definitely impacts on function) and then perhaps you'd have a valid argument. If being willing/able to chase well is not the breed's function, then I'm afraid I'm a little confused about what they're intended for. A dog needs to have drive, they need to have the ability to see that drive through. They are a hunting dog- see it, chase it, grab it. The vast majority of (racing bred) greyhounds I've dealt with have had sufficient drive and ability to do what they were intended for. Those that don't are not bred from.

To be blunt here, this argument makes me distrustful of people who breed for show. If they are unwilling to admit (when it is painfully obvious) that they need to go back several steps to address some major issues, then they are either unable to look objectively at their breed (in which case, they shouldn't be breeding) or they are knowingly ignoring the issues (in which case, they shouldn't be breeding).

The greyhound people are addressing your specific remarks about show greyhounds. As you know, people don't keep detailed health stats on dogs that are PTS because they don't work out for the track. However, anyone with some involvement with rescue greys has seen bad mouths, bad skin, eye disease, etc. All three of those issues are issues for OFC or hunting.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Not sure I'd do herding with a dog I was showing to title. Sheep can be bloody hard on dogs, especially young dogs. Plenty of people who work dogs for real reckon 'working' titles are no real test of a dog's real ability to work anyway.

So should we chuck working titles?

[Are You Serious Jo]

Don't forget those people who do real work with their dogs already have a pre-existing bias to dogs that aren't station bred or bred by a three sheep trialer. They have their set ideas about working ability without even seeing your dog work, I know this from talking to a number of them. The commands used (not the same words but the behaviours required) in ANKC trials are the same as three sheep trials and working farms. Apparently my coolie is useless because he doesn't work like a three sheep trialers dog, but he does the job very well at home. obviously I can show his as coolies aren't ANKC recognised but you bet I'd be showing and working him if she was.

I had also never heard the term barbie collies before and find it horribly insulting. I don't think those who have working breeds they show and trial would be happy with that either

[Salukifan]

Not sure I'd do herding with a dog I was showing to title. Sheep can be bloody hard on dogs, especially young dogs. Plenty of people who work dogs for real reckon 'working' titles are no real test of a dog's real ability to work anyway.

So should we chuck working titles?

Nope. As long as people don't really think that they mean the dogs can work for a living. I think there's nothing better than watching a dog do what it was bred to do, even if its a stylized version of it.

Edited December 26, 2012 by Haredown Whippets

[superminty]

Don't forget those people who do real work with their dogs already have a pre-existing bias to dogs that aren't station bred or bred by a three sheep trialer. They have their set ideas about working ability without even seeing your dog work, I know this from talking to a number of them. The commands used (not the same words but the behaviours required) in ANKC trials are the same as three sheep trials and working farms. Apparently my coolie is useless because he doesn't work like a three sheep trialers dog, but he does the job very well at home. obviously I can show his as coolies aren't ANKC recognised but you bet I'd be showing and working him if she was.

Actually (in Vic at least) there is some bias against dogs bred for 3 sheep trials, as their ability to do farm work has in some cases been diminished by breeding for such a specialist trial type. If people are doing farm work wth their 3 sheep trial dog, then I salute them - that's what they should be breeding for. Not always the case however. How often do you need to move 3 extremely flighty, terrified lambs through obstacles in a wide open field? I'd like more skill sets in my dog.

[Are You Serious Jo]

That's true now you mention it, it is very specialised and I'll remind the old coots of that next time they are telling me my dog is no good :laugh:

[mixeduppup]

One of my dogs is fantastic in real farm work but I'm pretty sure she'd never win a trial. The other is great for both.

[murve]

gezzz both my great Uncles ran over 2,000 head of sheep on their large properties, they use to run 3 BC's with a herd of over 150 to 500 head of sheep at one time, so if they were to use 1 dog with 3 flighty sheep it would be a romp in the park for these guys :D their BC's were treated as part of the family, they were all groomed on a regular basis.

I had Whippets when I was a kid, dad & I would take them out to farming properties & let them loose on the Rabbits they did extreamly well with manovering & catching. One of our Whippets would also have done well in shows if he was shown.

Yes there is a no breeds that have had their original stanard changed over the many years to the point they just cannot do what the breed was used for : Basset Hound, Shar Pei, Bulldog

are just a couple of the breeds

[Sandra777]

Yes there is a no breeds that have had their original stanard changed over the many years to the point they just cannot do what the breed was used for : Basset Hound, Shar Pei, Bulldog

are just a couple of the breeds

Could be wrong but I believe the Bulldog standard was completely unchanged from at least the early 1900's until just a couple of years ago after the PDE debarcle. The standard was (I believe) unchanged - people's interpretation of it was not

[melzawelza]

Yes there is a no breeds that have had their original stanard changed over the many years to the point they just cannot do what the breed was used for : Basset Hound, Shar Pei, Bulldog

are just a couple of the breeds

Could be wrong but I believe the Bulldog standard was completely unchanged from at least the early 1900's until just a couple of years ago after the PDE debarcle. The standard was (I believe) unchanged - people's interpretation of it was not

Too true. From my understanding (I could be wrong) most of these breeds that are just so far gone have standard with quite open-ended statements, often encouraging exaggeration. This is what has lead to people breeding for more and more exaggerated versions of the dogs they once were.

[jr_inoz]

not really good was it?

Saddest thing for me was seeing the so called "bone-mouthed" 'healthy' - non-show lines modern dog with CROPPED EARS!!!! bad choice of image there...

My shetland sheepdog never grows as much coat as the one in the video. One of my girls at the moment has dropped all her coat and currently has less coat than the 'original' example.

Both my girls are "fit for purpose" and have passed their herding instinct tests. They love it and their 'bad modern day coat' actually tends to repel dirt and water.

Very selective examples in that DVD - very exaggerated.

[Sandy46]

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.

[Are You Serious Jo]

The second post you made was the first one in this thread, why have you joined?

[murve]

like you Sandy having a long association with dogs, & have shown, discipline trials & worked on livestock farms, also worked dogs in a Abattoirs. Any working dog can be trained to work livestock.

Yes by looking through some of my old, & I mean Old breed standard books, some breeds have changed dramatically over the 40+ years. Like the breeds I mentioned before are the ones that really stand out in the breed standards

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Not sure I'd do herding with a dog I was showing to title. Sheep can be bloody hard on dogs, especially young dogs. Plenty of people who work dogs for real reckon 'working' titles are no real test of a dog's real ability to work anyway.

So should we chuck working titles?

Nope. As long as people don't really think that they mean the dogs can work for a living. I think there's nothing better than watching a dog do what it was bred to do, even if its a stylized version of it.

Just checking. I get a bit irritated by the "X sanctioned activity proves nothing" discussions. They don't show the full picture in the way that a 17th century crofter or 15th century bedu's dog might, but if it is the best we can do it still shows a lot. I know that if I have a choice between picking from a show only kennel and a show plus working titles kennel to choose a dog, I will go for the latter every time.

Edited December 26, 2012 by SkySoaringMagpie

[Sandy46]

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

[huski]

I love working line dogs and have no desire to own anything else, but they wont make good pets for people who are unsuitable for and who have no desire to high drive dogs. Often show line dogs make more suitable family pets and are more suitable to the average dog owner, not everyone wants or needs a working line dog. I think there are a place for both when responsibly bred.

[Bullbreedlover]

Yes there is a no breeds that have had their original stanard changed over the many years to the point they just cannot do what the breed was used for : Basset Hound, Shar Pei, Bulldog

are just a couple of the breeds

Could be wrong but I believe the Bulldog standard was completely unchanged from at least the early 1900's until just a couple of years ago after the PDE debarcle. The standard was (I believe) unchanged - people's interpretation of it was not

Almost right Sandra. There was a slight weight change alteration to the UK standard quite a few years ago.Aus and NZ took this weight change on board. Yes the UK standard has been altered now. But the ANKC and the NZKC have NOT taken these new changes on board.

The UK Standard as we knew it should never of been changed IMHO. Breeders interpretations of the Standard will always differ.

Murve, How many Bulldogs have you seen in your lifetime? As there are certainly a huge amount that have the ability to take on a Bull and they probably would given the opportunity. Given that it is illegal to do so and very barbaric no person in their right mind would do this today. But there are most certainly dogs of today that can. Many many dogs of yesteryear never even survived the sport and lived very short lives. Certainly the Bulldogs of today must look like they can bait a Bull.

The Bulldogs of yesteryear(of the Bullbaiting era and earlier) were very different dogs to the dogs of today. Bullbaiting was abolished in 1835. Before that it had been around for hundreds of years. The Philo-Kuon standard was drawn up in 1865 but it wasnt until 10 years later(1875)that the Standard as we know it today was drawn up and accepted. When this standard was drawn up it was necessary to preserve the vital characteristics which, in the course of the Centuries, had been built up in the Bulldog. Many people who drew up the Standard had in fact taken part in earlier Bullbaiting.

Had it not been for the advent of Dog Shows the Bulldog would of probably become extinct.

Every part of the Bulldog is there for a reason, although there was not much attention given in the early days to the ears or the tail. But of course Bulldogs of today are going to look different. But even to this day you will find in many litters across the world a specimen or two which do resemble the 'Old Style' Bulldogs.

The Standard was written for the preservation of the breed. Judges must judge to that Standard just as the Breeders must breed to that Standard.

I do get a bit sensitive to people saying "there is no Bulldog out there who can do the job it was bred for"

I have seen plenty of dogs and bitches who look very able to do that job.

If you ever care to read the many stories(of which many are to gruesome to reprint here) of Bullbaiting in the very early days you may then appreciate the Breed and the tenacity and courage and sheer determination that still holds the breed together today.

ETA and I was finally able to see the whole video. I couldnt view it the other day.

They showed a Bulldog from 1837.

And the Bulldog of today they showed was sitting down and looked quite overweight.

Is that the best (the video people)can do?

What a joke.

Edited December 27, 2012 by Bullbreedlover