Dog Site - Dog Stuff
Dog Forum | Dog Pictures

Go Back   Chazhound Dog Forum > Dog Discussions and Dog Talk Forums > The Dog Breeds


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-12-2009, 12:49 PM
Tahla9999's Avatar
Tahla9999 Tahla9999 is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,104
Default Watering down breeds...

Thought this might be interesting. So what is your opinion of making dog breeds more ''acceptable'' in today's society.

In my opinion, I disagree with it. There are certain breeds that I will not own because I don't want to deal with certain issues. A Akita for example. They are dogs who need more socialization with people and animals than other breeds. Even then, they can still be quite aloof to strangers. Their size coupled with their rather independent and protective nature made me realize they are a breed I am not particularly interested in owning. A lot of people are not fit to own an Akita. The Akita is also a breed that has a bit of a bad rap due to the fact that people took more than they could chew. Some breeders are trying to make this breed more loving and acceptable to strangers, lessen that protective instinct, make them more of an ''everybody'' dog. That I just can't agree with. Akita's are not for everyone. Potential owners of this breed need to accept the full responsibility of the true Akita. If you want a more stranger loving dog, there are plenty of other breeds that fit that description.

Patterdales are another breed that are not for everyone. They have a high prey drive, game, full of spunk and energy, tenacity and can be an overall handful. The breeders of this breed want to keep them just as they are because that combination makes them a great working terrier. They are definitely not a dog for people who want just a common house pet because these dogs need to have a job. Some people want to own a Patterdale but that they don't want to deal with the traits that go with them. Basically, they want to have the look of a Patterdale but the personalty of a toy poodle. Want them to be a house pet rather than a working terrier.

I believe that this just ruins the breed because all you have now is just a shell of what they once were, and I want to preserve that instinctual ability. That is my opinion anyway.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-12-2009, 06:19 PM
Fran101's Avatar
Fran101 Fran101 is offline
Resident fainting goat
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 12,299
Default

I think dogs that were bred/created for companionship and friendliness to ALL should be kept that way and working dogs should be kept that way.
You lifestyle should fit the breed, you shouldnt make the breed fit your lifestyle

Hmm.. i want a husky but im a lazyass and dont like to run. that means DONT BUY A HUSKY, get a dog more suited to what you want in a dog.

I do agree with breeding aggression and other negative traits out of a dogs, but not workability, drive, ect..

like those "shiloh shepherds".. dont even get me started. ughh lets breed the drive out of a GSD, make them totally unworkable and make them HUGE and give them fluffy coats.

the same kind of thing is happening to border collies, people want them but they dont want to deal with how smart, active, drivey, ect.. they are. so some people are watering them down to black and white fluffy shadows of what a border collie is supposed to be!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-12-2009, 07:08 PM
corgipower's Avatar
corgipower corgipower is offline
Tweleve Enthusiest
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: here
Posts: 8,233
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fransheska101 View Post
I do agree with breeding aggression and other negative traits out of a dogs, but not workability, drive, ect..
In many breeds, to breed aggression out of them would also breed out the workability and drive. In many breeds - terriers, working breeds, some herders - the aggressive tendencies are because of the tenacity needed for their work. They are breeds that tend to not back down.

That doesn't mean you can't have dogs within those breeds that aren't aggressive, but it means that if you're going to own those breeds, you need to be prepared to deal with aggression if it develops.
__________________
The slayer of all things happy since 2010
Kibble feeder since 1973

Extreme owner of four herding dogs

puzzles, poetry and so much more ~ Doggy Puzzles created by me
sleep!!!
My dog Votes!
proud member of the MUMS 2009 7th place team CISRA 2009 1st place team SUMS 2009 2nd place team
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-12-2009, 07:10 PM
Fran101's Avatar
Fran101 Fran101 is offline
Resident fainting goat
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 12,299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by corgipower View Post
In many breeds, to breed aggression out of them would also breed out the workability and drive. In many breeds - terriers, working breeds, some herders - the aggressive tendencies are because of the tenacity needed for their work. They are breeds that tend to not back down.

That doesn't mean you can't have dogs within those breeds that aren't aggressive, but it means that if you're going to own those breeds, you need to be prepared to deal with aggression if it develops.
good point.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-13-2009, 07:29 AM
Groch's Avatar
Groch Groch is offline
Gadget Hound
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Denver Colorado
Posts: 270
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fransheska101 View Post
.......You lifestyle should fit the breed, you shouldn't make the breed fit your lifestyle...
Of course ALL purebred dogs got that way become someone bred them to fit their lifestyle. As much as I love my poodle, I know he did not show up one day on someones porch all poodily. In most cases this fitting the breed to the lifestyle did not happen too long ago...150 years ago, or a lot less.

I do not understand (please explain it to me) why some dog fanciers seem to think that this genetic engineering was fine 100 years ago, but must stop now.

I DO think that it is fine for the AKC and its members to decide that a barkless beagle should no longer be called a beagle. Perhaps that is the question being posed here.

HOWEVER, if you do not want AKC Beagles to change, then it seems to me you should support those who want to establish "Puggles" as a breed if they better suite the need of today's owners.

If AKC practices and policies encourage good breeding practices, then why not be more open to making "designer dogs" legit.

If the only "legitimate" dogs are ones that are bred for show, or bred to do a job that is for the most part no longer done, then the vast majority of dog owners are left out in the cold.

I already can imagine one reply, "Let them have golden retrievers". Well, not everyone wants a dog that looks like a golden retriever, and some folks are allergic. We'll soon see how well "Portuguese Water Dogs" fit into normal society. Perhaps they will do fine (I know nothing about them, but Bo sure is cute). However, if they don't fit in with typical family life, then why not legitimize a slightly more suburbs friendly version....a "Portuguese Swimming Pool Dog" perhaps.

Refusal to change ANYTHING results in more dogs in shelters, or dogs that are not happy living in conditions not meant for them.

Just an alternate view.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-13-2009, 07:57 AM
corgipower's Avatar
corgipower corgipower is offline
Tweleve Enthusiest
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: here
Posts: 8,233
Default

Groch, I have no objection to someone creating a new breed. I have an issue with "designer dogs" that are simply a mixed breed, but I have no problem with the work that is being done by some to establish the labradoodle. There are a few people breeding labradoodle to labradoodle and getting labradoodle. That's fine. But those who simply continue to breed lab to poodle with no intention of ever getting future generations to breed true do bother me.

Quote:
Refusal to change ANYTHING results in more dogs in shelters, or dogs that are not happy living in conditions not meant for them.
No, it doesn't. People getting dogs when they aren't prepared to meet the needs of the dog results in them ending up in shelters.

If people suddenly decide they need a PWD and if PWD breeders don't ensure that their dogs are going to suitable homes - if there is suddenly a wave of BYBers and puppy millers irresponsibly breeding and selling PWD's, that will cause an increase in PWD's in shelters, as they are certainly not a breed for just anyone and BYB and puppy mill bred PWD's could very well become absolute horrors.

A responsible breeder will assess the buyer, educate the buyer and make all attempts to ensure that the buyer is a suitable home for their breed. If I were to breed malinois and someone came to me looking for a malinois who wasn't cut out for owning one, they would get turned away. I would first explain to them everything a malinois needs and why I felt that it wasn't the breed for them. They might continue to go to other malinois breeders, and might get turned away again and again.

In an ideal world, they would either need to make changes in their lifestyle to suit the breed or they would need to find another breed that is more suitable. Sad to say, this isn't an ideal world, and the odds are that eventually they would find a malinois breeder who is not so responsible who will sell them a puppy they aren't cut out for.

So...back to your statement - "Refusal to change ANYTHING results in more dogs in shelters, or dogs that are not happy living in conditions not meant for them." - yes, now I agree. Find ways to get rid of BYBers and puppy millers without hurting responsible breeders. Change the idea that everyone should be entitled to own the dog of their choice, whether it's a good match or not. Educate prospective puppy buyers on suitability and research and preparedness. And people need to accept the idea that there are some breeds they shouldn't own.

There are a number of breeds I love. I enjoy them when they come to the kennel, I enjoy them when they're in a training class with me, I enjoy reading about them and looking at them. But I'll never own them because I know they aren't suitable for my house and my lifestyle and my other dogs.
__________________
The slayer of all things happy since 2010
Kibble feeder since 1973

Extreme owner of four herding dogs

puzzles, poetry and so much more ~ Doggy Puzzles created by me
sleep!!!
My dog Votes!
proud member of the MUMS 2009 7th place team CISRA 2009 1st place team SUMS 2009 2nd place team
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-13-2009, 08:00 AM
Dekka's Avatar
Dekka Dekka is offline
Just try me..
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ontario
Posts: 19,262
Default

In many ways Groch I agree with you. I do think that new breeds that are more suitable to todays world should not be villified. But the issue with that is there are so so few GOOD breeders doing it.

If you plan to make a new breed you start out with a plan, a goal. You don't just breed 2 dogs together and make up a name by mixing the two breed names together. You get past F1 generations etc etc. I am all for ethical breeding of any breed.

I hate to see some of the JRT breeders who breed strictly for conformation. Their excess dogs go to the pet market. Which is fine in a way. But it means they breed for the watered down JRT temperament so they can easily pet the extra dogs out.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:37 PM.


1997-2013 Chazhound Dog Site