Beautiful Temperament:

[Lhok]

where do you go to look at the extensions? or do some breeds just not have them?

The Akita standard reads

Temperament:

Dignified, courageous, aloof, tends to show dominance over other dogs, though the trait is not encouraged.

--Lhok

[Trisven13]

The Fauve standard actually says a lot but most of it is based on their working ability.

The Basset Fauve de Bretagne are impassioned hunters but are also excellent companions of man, sociable, affectionate and equable. They adapt themselves easily to all terrains, even the most difficult, and to all quarry. When hunting they reveal themselves to be courageous, wily, and obstinate, which makes them very successful.

[BlackJaq]

A temperament that conforms to the breed standard is a correct temperament for that dog. However, your "beautiful" temperament, whatever that may be in this case, may be completely incorrect for other breeds, especially if they are going to be a working dog.

I

Your comment about selection for behavioral traits in working dogs differing from what would be selected for show dogs, is borne out by this research paper.

http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/group/AnimPersInst/Animal%20Personality%20PDFs/S/Sa-Sc/Svartburg%202006.pdf

Interestingly, sandgrubber posted this paper up in the research papers section of DOL.

No, what I meant was that the standard Labrador Temperament would be completely incorrect for a Working Anatolian Shepherd for example.

Just because the OP prefers the particular temperament that their pups have, does not make it correct for every dog. Sorry if I was not clear on this before.

Yes, that's the consequence of those findings. A dog with a 'working dog' breed label that's bred for showing tends to have certain differences in pattern of behavioral traits from any of the breeds that are actually used as working dogs. Because the actual working dogs require certain traits, to do that work. Those certain behavioral traits tend not to be consistent with what's required for dogs to be shown...

The Conclusion section of that research paper neatly summarizes it.

And I think your comments are spot on.

Ah ok, sorry for the confusion!

Sadly this paper then confirms my opinion that some breeds are less suited to be purely pets if the breed standard is adhered to. Which unfortunately means that compromises are being made to make those breeds suitable to be pets anyway (mostly for breeds that are not commonly used for their original work anymore, obviously you can always have a dud who may be suitable as a pet but not as a worker).

I struggle a lot with this concept, as one day I hope to become a breeder of my breed of choice, but the correct working temperament would make the pups all but unsuitable for the average Australian pet owner. This then leaves me in a position where I can either not breed and avoid the whole issue, cull numbers at birth, struggle to find working homes for each pup(seems unlikely with litters that tend to exceed 10 + pups vs number of people using the breed to work) or I can compromise on the quality of the dogs to make the "excess" suitable for pet homing. Neither option is currently particularly attractive to me so I may end up importing a working dog for my own needs and probably never end up breeding it anyway. An expensive bit of personal indulgence though that would be...

Anyway, don't mind me too much, it is not exactly a crippling issue at present

Edited September 5, 2013 by BlackJaq

[mita]

Exactly, BlackJaq. Shows how research can come up with something that sharp-eyed observers have already noticed.

And I think, again, you're spot on, in what significance this has for people who want to breed a particular kind of dog that has not-readily pet-compliant traits in its standard. May also likely mean that certain of those traits don't lend themselves to the show situation.

As that paper said... high level in traits such as inquisitiveness.

[Bjelkier]

where do you go to look at the extensions? or do some breeds just not have them?

The Akita standard reads

Temperament:

Dignified, courageous, aloof, tends to show dominance over other dogs, though the trait is not encouraged.

--Lhok

Not all breeds have them.

Samoyeds do, Havanese don't.

[mirawee]

where do you go to look at the extensions? or do some breeds just not have them?

The Akita standard reads

Temperament:

Dignified, courageous, aloof, tends to show dominance over other dogs, though the trait is not encouraged.

--Lhok

If your breed has an official extended standard there will be a link to it from the ANKC breed standard page. The Akita didn't have one though.

ETA: I don't know how anyone can not take temperament into account when breeding. First up if you want to show you need a dog who will catch the eye in the ring for the right reasons and temperament is a part of this. Also when assessing which home pups are going to temperament again plays a big part for deciding which puppy is best in which home.

Edited September 5, 2013 by mirawee

[raineth]

Blckjaq,

I often mull over the same sort of conundrum.

I wonder if the demands for the average pet dog today don't necessarily sit with the temperaments espoused in the breed standards.

But at the same time would it be right to change the temperaments bred for in each individual breed just to suit a predominantly pet market.

I don't know. I guess good arguments could be made for both.

In the breed I have taken most interest in, Great Danes, I do personally think that breeders should be breeding with pet market in mind as I don't think there is any call out there whatsoever for people wanting Danes to hunt boar with.

I think the GD breeders who take temperament seriously are keeping both the temperament characteristic to the breed, while also considering its suitability for the pet home.

I sadly still hear story after story though of Danes with anxiety problems, particularly separation anxiety and reactivity. As this is not called for in a traditional temperament and certainly not suitable to a pet home, it suggests to me that maybe temperament isn't being prioritized by some GD breeders.

Clearly though many other breeds are still divided into those used for original purpose such as herding dogs, but still a lot of people own these dogs just as pets, not using them for their original purpose or a new purpose such as agility. So I guess it would be up to each individual breeder to decide whether they should prioritise traditional temperament, or 'pet temperament'.

The other example I can think of (although I know less about it) is the Scottish terrier. I think you could largely say that their purpose these days is that of being a pet, and I believe many breeders over the last few decades have selected for a less dour temperament.

I know Sheridan would have a lot to say on this topic!

Edited September 5, 2013 by raineth

[Rebanne]

All I can say is you clearly move in very different circles to me. Temperament has always been top of my list of desired characteristics in a dog. I did my first temperament tests on a friend's ltter years ago. Did a DOLers too.

Maybe its coming to purebred dogs through dog sports that made a difference.

Desireable temperament is going to vary between breeds - so there is no one size fits all "best" temperament in a dog. However the first thing I always like to find is resilience.

me too, temperament has always been a biggie with me. I love bounceback! (resilience)

[W Sibs]

temperament is 1st on my list when I look for a pup

I can live with a badly structure dog with an awesome temperament but it's hard living with a bad temperament dog with a good structure

Edited September 5, 2013 by W Sibs

[Mummamia]

Really Sandgrubber Your world never considers temperament above everything? I hope you do what you can to change this attitude... I am so happy to read a post from someone that is starting to consider the important aspects of a dog rather than what it looks like, their ideas of standard. Personally, I don't give a rats about whether they are a purebred... However my latest who I originally fostered and later adopted is a pure breed and she is a goofy looking girl... She kept being past over for looks... I am the winner cause she is the most sensational temperament and most intelligent dog I have ever had... In a particular park I go to has two areas. If someone comes in with a dog who is a bit of a concern, boisterous or pushy... I take my other two ... shy girl and feisty girl into the small section and put goofy girl in with theirs to play... People are so appreciative of this as they find it hard to socialise because of their dogs personality... There's a lady with a very large dog and when she comes in people get their dogs out of the way... The dog is only 7 months old and is missing out because of their perception... Goofy girl has a ball with this dog... He's a great dog... just BIG... I recall a few months back when a little girl, about 6 yrs old pointed at my three as I was walking them and said... 'Look mum two dogs and a pig'... Out of the mouths of children... I do hope you continue to consider what you have learned and get past looks as well cause 'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder' My goofy girl is beautiful to me and she is beyond beautiful on the inside... :D

This is NOT revolutionary thinking - LOTS of purebred dog breeders select and reject dogs based on temperament. Wendy Volhard's Puppy Attitude Test for litters was first filmed in 1981 and is well known.

Sorry, but how a dog looks in terms of structure and its compliance to a breed standard IS important to some of us. You don't have to make a choice between looks and temperament - its possible to get the whole package.

I happen to like beautiful (to my eyes) dogs with sound temperament and I'm certainly not ashamed of that.

In my response 'Your world' refers to Sandgrubber who shared the experiences of breeding in Florida... Not 'everybodys' world in the dog breeding community... I then simply shared my experience with a dog who didn't look pretty and was passed over repeatedly, but has shown herself to be the best temperament... I also have the pretty version of the breed... Chosen not for looks but for the connection I had with her and the desire to give her the right home to help her become the best she can be... I don't understand your annoyance with my post and also don't understand how you came to the conclusion that I was in any way judging anyone as to how they choose their dogs... Personally, my heart is with the imperfect not the perfect and that's me and many others...

'Every heart beat deserves to be in the right home'... That's all that matters to the dog... :)

[Salukifan]

In my response 'Your world' refers to Sandgrubber who shared the experiences of breeding in Florida... Not 'everybodys' world in the dog breeding community... I then simply shared my experience with a dog who didn't look pretty and was passed over repeatedly, but has shown herself to be the best temperament... I also have the pretty version of the breed... Chosen not for looks but for the connection I had with her and the desire to give her the right home to help her become the best she can be... I don't understand your annoyance with my post and also don't understand how you came to the conclusion that I was in any way judging anyone as to how they choose their dogs... Personally, my heart is with the imperfect not the perfect and that's me and many others...

'Every heart beat deserves to be in the right home'... That's all that matters to the dog... :)

You might not know this but Sandgrubber did most of her breeding in WA. If it's in Australia, its in my world.

I'm not annoyed by your post. I simply wanted to refute the idea that good looks and good temperament can't be found in the same dog and to correct any notion that breeding to a breed standard that does not consider temperament is common. You suggested that attitudes needed to be changed. I'm commenting that the attitude that temperament is not important is not one I have encountered here.

I think its commendable that your heart is with the imperfect dogs. No dog is perfect, even if we like to think so. However some imperfections simply cannot be tolerated in a breeding program and poor temperament IMO is one of them. We werent' simply talking about pets here.

Edited September 5, 2013 by Haredown Whippets

[WreckitWhippet]

I still shake my head at those who believe they can't breed , with all things considered equally. Why can't you breed for type, temperament, structure and soundness.

If you breed giving due consideration to all, then you shouldn't be left lamenting over such things.

[BlackJaq]

Blckjaq,

I often mull over the same sort of conundrum.

I wonder if the demands for the average pet dog today don't necessarily sit with the temperaments espoused in the breed standards.

But at the same time would it be right to change the temperaments bred for in each individual breed just to suit a predominantly pet market.

I don't know. I guess good arguments could be made for both.

In the breed I have taken most interest in, Great Danes, I do personally think that breeders should be breeding with pet market in mind as I don't think there is any call out there whatsoever for people wanting Danes to hunt boar with.

I think the GD breeders who take temperament seriously are keeping both the temperament characteristic to the breed, while also considering its suitability for the pet home.

I sadly still hear story after story though of Danes with anxiety problems, particularly separation anxiety and reactivity. As this is not called for in a traditional temperament and certainly not suitable to a pet home, it suggests to me that maybe temperament isn't being prioritized by some GD breeders.

Clearly though many other breeds are still divided into those used for original purpose such as herding dogs, but still a lot of people own these dogs just as pets, not using them for their original purpose or a new purpose such as agility. So I guess it would be up to each individual breeder to decide whether they should prioritise traditional temperament, or 'pet temperament'.

The other example I can think of (although I know less about it) is the Scottish terrier. I think you could largely say that their purpose these days is that of being a pet, and I believe many breeders over the last few decades have selected for a less dour temperament.

I know Sheridan would have a lot to say on this topic!

Re the bolded bit: I have noticed this in my breed and actually had people (just regular people, not dog breeders or show people) comment on how they always thought Weimaraners are a nervy breed when they stop me to ask about Foxy and pat her.

I have a personal suspicion (no hard proof or anything) that maybe when a strong breed becomes popular with the general pet owning public, some breeders, or even the majority, may attempt to alter the temperament to be more suitable for a pet lifestyle. This would not be easy with a breed with strong guarding and/or hunting traits (Weimaraners are actually a perfomance breed in their country of origin Germany, only after health checks, a temperament assessment/test and passed hunting exams can a dog get a licence to breed registered offspring and guarding an item of the owner's is part of the temp assessment, some handlers also choose to get their hunting Weimaraner titled in Schutzhund, so a large number of the dogs are suitable for bite training and quite successful as well).

My personal thought is that in attempting to breed dogs better suited to pet homes, maybe dogs with weaker temperaments (i.e. less dominant, less drive) and less nerve were chosen in a mistaken belief that their offspring might be more easy for a pet owner to deal with.

Of course good nerve and confidence are very important in a pet dog, too, but maybe that was a realization that either came to late or never.

Anyway, this is the only reasonable explanation that I have been able to come up with, that explains why a breed that was originally strong, confident and possibly "combative" (for lack of a better word) has now got so many issues with anxiety, timidness, fear biting etc.

I can't say the tendency to separation anxiety is different in pet lines to working lines as far as I know though, it seems common in many if not all gun dog breeds if the dog does not learn about alone time early on. I mostly hear about pet homes having issues with this though, as the entire upbringing and level of handling/training are often completely different and there may be issues of unawareness in those who do not thoroughly inform themselves in advance. Many gun dogs would spend almost all day most days with their hunting owners and so today's lifestyle of full time jobs away from home or dogs staying in backyards on their own is very different. I don't think most gun dogs make good backyard/outside only dogs at all even today.

BTW I don't think Great Danes and Weimaraners are the only ones affected by this, German Shepherds come to mind as well and I am sure there are more breeds which I am not as familiar with, which are also suffering from issues with poor temperaments such as this

ETA: Now that Foxy is nearly three years old and pretty much matured, I actually find her temperament not as confident as I would like and I am very happy with my decision to spay her (she was done at 18 months) as I would prefer a stronger temperament to breed with. It is not an issue on the pet side of things as she is well socialized and had extensive training but on the hunting side of things I do wonder if she will hold up under stress or on big game if we ever decide to tackle it and I definitely don't think she is the best that the breed can be, hence my saying earlier I would like to import a proven dog from Germany one day)

Edited September 5, 2013 by BlackJaq

[raineth]

Wow that's really interesting about the Weim's blackjaq! I knew they had been used for guarding as well as hunting but I didn't realise the extent of it and how they are still used in Germany.

I found your theory really interesting. It certainly makes a lot of sense.

It could very well be in some cases that the attempt to make them more suitable as pets may have mistakenly led to a selection for nervousness instead. I know that the Great Danes around Victorian times ( I think it was) were renowned for their aggression.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

...

No standard I know has "one or two words" on temperament.

...

Don't look at the Saluki standard one then... But it is lacking in many regards.

Oi oi oi!! Them's fightin' words! :laugh:

The Saluki standard is beautiful, and just needs to be read with the general characteristics at the forefront of one's mind. When people have messed with the standard, they have invariably watered it down to fit local politics at the time (colour, removing performance criteria) and made it worse as a result.

Under general characteristics it says: The expression should be dignified and gentle with deep, faithful, farseeing eyes. That is as much a description of temperament as it is anything else.

You don't get "dignified" if you hit the deck and wee yourself every time someone so much as looks at you, and it's tricky to be gentle if you want to take out the nearest same sex adult dog in any encounter. Someone once explained those two words to me by way of comparing a line up of Open Dog Afghans (a certain keen fierceness) with a line up of Open Dog Salukis. That's when the dignified and gentle of the Saluki comes through.

There is also a very useful breed extension available on the ANKC website which says:

Characteristic temperament is reserved with strangers, dignified, intelligent and independent, neither nervous nor aggressive. Adolescents should be handled with sensitivity

[Jed]

Most of the breeders I know aim for the big 3 - temperament/health/conformation. The standard dictates temperament, and it may only be a few words but they are usually descriptive and succinct.

IMHO, after a lifetime of breeding, temperament is of prime importance. If the croup is a little high, or the back a little long, the pet owner (90% or more of owners) will not care if his dog is agreeable, trainable, affectionate, and fits the characteristics he believed he would get when he bought the breed.

It is my opinion also that many of the dogs who are dumped to not have good temperaments. Both pure and x bred.

I don't mean dogs who bite, I mean dogs with separation anxiety, dogs who don't have good nerve, dogs who are jittery and hard to train, etc etc.

Conformation judging assesses the dogs' temperaments. And ringside judges can also see whether the dogs have the correct standard. A cavalier with his tail tucked under is not a good thing ... "fearless"

Standard

Characteristics: Sporting, affectionate, absolutely fearless.

Temperament: Gay, friendly, non-aggressive; no tendency to nervousness.

There are not a lot of words there, but they are very clear, and easy for a breeder to follow.

[sandgrubber]

I posted in an emotional state and didn't explain well. I'm in the position of needing to select one pup to keep. I hope to end out with temperament like the dam...who has been a fantastic dog. I wish I had better skills and tools to make the selection.

Go to The Dogs West site and check out the material presented to people who want to become breeders. Virtually nothing on how to breed for temperament. Have a breeder over to help you choose the pup you keep. What do they look at...maybe they are evaluating temperament in the back of their mind, but all they articulate is physical conformation. At least that has been my experience. Ask for material to help you select pups and you end out with Pat Hastings Puppy Puzzle.

Sure there are temperament tests. Put a litter of Lab pups through Volhard and you get mostly 3s and 4s....repeat the test the next day or with a different tester and you'll get a somewhat different set of 3s and 4s.

I'll bet most dog fanatics have raised one or two dogs whose temperament was well above the crowd. For working dog types this would be a super working dog. For pet people it might be a dog that was outstanding in its dignity, or a dog that was super attentive and affectionate...or just extremely smart.

We (hopefully) select to keep dogs temperaments within the limits prescribed by the standard. Many breeders can and do spot the pup with temperament problems by 8 weeks. I don't think most of us have the skills to recognize or select outstanding temperament, at least not at 8 weeks. Maybe it can't be done. I wish, looking back, that I had invested more heavily in trying to identify and perfect temperament.

Very big ask, btw. If you're considering use of a stud dog whom you will probably never meet, you will never meet you may find information on working ability, or a few words like 'mellow' or 'tireless' or 'high drive', but the information available on physical conformation will be much more complete than that on temperament. Unfortunately, temperament doesn't show well in a photograph.

[BlackJaq]

I would not choose a sire in such a manner. I am already forging connections with Weimaraner breeders in Germany and intend on visiting any potential semen import donor when I am in Germany to see my family. I also intend on seeing the dog out working and in the home and I will view all his test scores and speak to the Club and other members as the community is tightly knit and many members regularly hunt together (including their dogs) so I would be able to get several independent opinions on the dog.

I would no sooner pick a dog from a catalogue or website without meeting him than I would buy a car without test driving it and having a mechanic check it.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Temperament in a photograph. This is the sire of my imports.

Yes I visited Europe, yes I met many of the other relatives while I was there. I'm not saying you should not buy sight unseen, you certainly should not. But I am saying that many breeders still really care about temperament and the results are wonderful.

[mita]

Temperament in a photograph. This is the sire of my imports.

... I am saying that many breeders still really care about temperament and the results are wonderful.

SSM, that's a beautiful photograph, made me teary. :) Speaks volumes about the temperament of that lovely dog. And your imports from him.

A video that also spoke volumes to me, was when the final Tibbies were being judged for Best of Breed at Crufts last year.

The judges announced winner was a British breeder with his little black & tan dog.

That breeder didn't turn to judges & audience and raise an arm in victory.

He looked straight at his dog, who was looking up at him, with tail wagging... & opened his arms. The little mite flew up into his arms for the biggest cuddle. Undoubtedly had been there lots of times before. :)

And, yes, a NSW breeder had already imported a tib from this man.

I show pics like that and yours, to people interested in getting a pet. So they can see the wonderful results that registered breeders get ... by putting all together .... temperament, health, conformation.