Another question!!!

[Angel Chicken]

Ok, so all this talk about breeding pet quality dogs and performance, it got me thinking....

So, my question is for the breeders on the board, or anyone else that has input on this :)

If you have, let's say a JRT. This JRT isn't showed in AKC or UKC, and only does agility, fly ball, and hunting, and has titles in all three. Would this dog be considered worthy of breeding if he excelled in hunting, fly ball, and agility?

[mrose_s]

i personally think it would. but it would be classed as working lines, not show lines. providing it met all health tests etc...

am i right?

[Angel Chicken]

That is what I was wondering...

What I mean is... if a JRT is a working dog and has titles in working, is he still considered an ambassador to his breed, and should he be allowed to breed? Does he have to be a show prospect as well?

[noludoru]

I, personally, would say no. Just because he excels in sports (or anything but the show ring + health&temperament testing for that matter, unless it's what the JRT was developed to do--hunting, and then only maybe) doesn't mean he's worthy to breed. He could really hae anything wrong with him, or bad temperament, etc. Besides, I'm very much into standards, and would want a show-worthy dog. But that's JMO.

[Lizmo]

What I mean is... if a JRT is a working dog and has titles in working, is he still considered an ambassador to his breed, and should he be allowed to breed? Does he have to be a show prospect as well?

IMO, I think he would be a good dog to breed. Because in order to be a GOOD working dog, he would have to have a good comformation to perform the tast needed. But see, it all comes down to what do show lines do to the breed? I am not sure about JRT, but I know that it does a lot to borders. :(

[ChRotties]

IMO, yes, it would have to be an ideal to the standard ....coat, temperament, size..etc..

Just because a dog has working titles doesn't necessarily mean that makes him/her breeding worthy.

Any reputable breeder that truly cares about the breed as a whole, NOT just their individual program, would breed for the complete dog.

[LexTalionis]

i think breeding a working dog who excel at what his breed was intended to do is more important then breeding one that won a beauty contest.

[Laurelin]

IMO, yes, it would have to be an ideal to the standard ....coat, temperament, size..etc..

Just because a dog has working titles doesn't necessarily mean that makes him/her breeding worthy.

Any reputable breeder that truly cares about the breed as a whole, NOT just their individual program, would breed for the complete dog.

My thoughts as well. If he conformed to standard, had an appropriate temperament, and was healthy then yes.

[bubbatd]

Why not if she has all the tests and is within the standard .... but then , the offspring can't be guaranteed to excel in agility . So what would you really be breeding for ??

[Momof2Pups]

Why not if she has all the tests and is within the standard .... but then , the offspring can't be guaranteed to excel in agility . So what would you really be breeding for ??
Agreed. Agility is not much of a reason to breed for me.

[showpug]

How would the person who owned the dog truly know if it meets the standard if they aren't getting an outsider's opinion, like a judge?

I think in some breeds, performance and working ability are very important, but so is breeding standard typey dogs as well. It's one thing for someone to think their dog meets the standard and it's another thing for a complete outsider who knows the standard inside and out to think the dog meets it. This is why I think conformation can be important.

You don't know how many times I stumble across Pug BYB sites where they are talking up and down about all the great points on their dog and how it meets the standard and is breed worthy when the dog is a very poor example on the breed.

[Psyfalcon]

But, in a working terrier, I think the working ability comes before anything else. If its been properly evaluated hunting, then I think its fair to say its a good terrier.

It should look like a terrier, and act like one, but I would not hold the show standard to a high level in a working dog. Are the faults truly impacting the dog, or just make it look "unpretty" (back to the BC issue).

Size, coat, structure, and temperament would be required for a good working dog. Nitpicking details over a good working dog's ability is less than useful to the breed.

[Angel Chicken]

That is what I am saying...

Kinda like with GSD's. Some are bred to work, some for show... in my opinion, for the one's that were bred to work, they wouldn't need a showing title to be worthy of breeding. If they had schutzhund titles, hunting, ect, that would be enough in my book to say "Hey-- this boy is a great breeding prospect!"

[Laurelin]

In my breed, type is very important. We're lacking typey dogs around here from so many average breedings in my opinion. People in my breed breed anything that is titled (or sometimes not) and it really does lead to a lot of issues regarding breed type amongst our dogs versus other countries.

I'd never do a breeding without regards to how typey the dog is and the dog's conformation. The best way to judge that is to get someone else other than you to evaluate the dog honestly. So that's why conformation is important to me.

I too see many BYB sites for paps talking about how wonderful their dogs are and they really look nothing like the breed. One of the many perks of having a toy breed I suppose.

[stevinski]

IMO a dog must have both show and working titles to be put forward for breeding

[stevinski]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But, in a working terrier, I think the working ability comes before anything else. If its been properly evaluated hunting, then I think its fair to say its a good terrier.

It should look like a terrier, and act like one, but I would not hold the show standard to a high level in a working dog. Are the faults truly impacting the dog, or just make it look "unpretty" (back to the BC issue).

Size, coat, structure, and temperament would be required for a good working dog. Nitpicking details over a good working dog's ability is less than useful to the breed.

i know in the border terrier breed a show fault is anything that can effect the dogs ability to work,
i know there definetly isnt alot, if any seperation between the show and workin lines with the borders apart from the occasional chunky border in the show ring, but the judges generally wnt place a chunky border as they have to be able to span the dog with their hands
and the general appearence as taken from the standard says 'essentially a workin terrier'

[SpringerLover]

...but the extent of "working titles" is sooooo low on the priority list of many and completely disregarded by even more.

Attaining a MACH/OTCH/ADCH/NATCH DOES prove things about your dog. And just as they say... breeding two CH's together doesn't guarantee another CH being produced... neither does breeding working dogs.