Is the Dog Fancy Changing?

[crazedACD]

Originally Posted by sillysally

This is true, but unfortunately there are still way too many people breeding their horses just because they have the correct plumbing. It is typically not too difficult to find people with mediocre stallions willing to breed them for a cheap stud fee. Also, a scary number of horse people think color (palomino, dun, buckskin, cremello, paint, pinto, black) + correct plumbing=MUST be bred! Therefore there are many "pretty" colored horses out there that are of very mediocre or poor quality.

Oh yeah, definitely. Color breeders . I've been to the auctions too...not a pretty place . And you know, I had a few mares..each one I was told by multiple people that I should breed them. And...told by people I respect and knew well (like the gal I boarded with). Nevermind I was 18 years old, had no experience raising foals, and my horses weren't really anything special.

[frostfell]

Originally Posted by BostonBanker

2) There is so, so much less concern over "pure" lines, at least in the horse world I am in. I've said a million times that dogs would be better off if they were bred like sport horses. Performance matters most; cross breeding is fine if both parents are approved by the registry. The stallion at the barn where I keep Tristan can have his foals registered as Belgian Warmbloods, Dutch Warmbloods, Oldenburgs, and International Sport Horses. You can bring Thoroughbred into a line and still have it "pure". I'm sure in the breed world, there is far more an issue with that, but even associations like the Arabians and Morgans have special classes and awards for half-breeds.

This. So much this. I dont know how other breeds would handle it but Iv said for years that the American Bully needs "acceptable outcrosses" like they do in horses and cats, and the outcross has to be approved via breed wardens so make sure its actually needed. Dogs becoming too tall and light boned? Outcross to Bulldog. Becoming too heavy? Outcross to Staffordshire Bull Terrier. In a pet breed where the personality traits brought in via each outcross type dont matter so much, I cant see this being a bad idea.

Now in farm dogs, or hunting dogs, these things need ot be handled more carefully, but then again, ranchers and hunters dont care about papers and will gleefully do a 1/4 pit bull 1/4 borda colleh 1/4 kelpie etc til the cows come home (pun intended)

[sillysally]

Originally Posted by crazedACD

Oh yeah, definitely. Color breeders . I've been to the auctions too...not a pretty place . And you know, I had a few mares..each one I was told by multiple people that I should breed them. And...told by people I respect and knew well (like the gal I boarded with). Nevermind I was 18 years old, had no experience raising foals, and my horses weren't really anything special.

Oh yeah, I had people say that with my mare as well. She was fantastic in many ways, but did not have a temperament or conformation that necessarily needed to be passed on.

For whatever reason in this area I tend to see a lot of people breeding grade ponies (because they're cute you know), and purebred but mediocre breedings of more common breeds such as Quarter horses and paints because the resulting offspring "will have papers."

[Kilter]

I'm sorta in the middle but closer to the purebred world. Honestly it sounds silly but I wish all the groups would get off their high horses, sit down and realize that pretty much all the groups have the same goal - improve dog's lives.

I know lots of breeders, with quality dogs, who show and compete. They love dogs and send people to rescue whenever they can, will drive for hours to help out a dog of their breed and so on. Most have nothing against a rescued dog either really, and dislike puppy millers and byb's who add to the population problem. Most have heard horror stories about AR people doing things at shows, rescues refusing to give a dog back to the breeder, suddenly increasing the 'adoption' fee for a rare breed because there isn't a lot of them in rescue and a breeder informed them what the dog was.

The rescue people I know, some are level headed, but I see a lot of death threats towards all breeders, regardless of what the breeder does. Not just 'oh those breeders' but real threats to them, their families, dogs, you name it. I've even heard a 'dog loving' rescue person say HORRID things about a purebred pup that walked in the door with his ears cropped - I get that it's an issue with some but really?

It would be really cool if breeders and rescues worked together. Imagine if rescue litters got temperament tested by an experienced breeder, who then helped figure out which pup went to which owner, and then was on call to help those puppy owners. Or the foster home whelping the litter and raising it with that experienced help. Lots of breeders drive dog friendly vehicles to get a breeding done, pick up a dog, go to dog shows, imagine the transportation help there. Or the 'do not adopt' lists. Or if someone really wanted a purebred whippet and didn't care if it was from a rescue or a breeder, and either group worked together to find that person a dog either way.

Add to that here, the HS is in the middle in a lot of ways. They will work with the rescues, and yes, do 'kill' some animals when required to do so. If the dog isn't adoptable, if it's not a dog they'd want their neighbor to get and have next door, or is likely to eat another dog or a kid, then no, it's not put up for adoption and put down. The rescues in the area BASH them quite a bit for being a 'kill' shelter, but at the same time, if it's a dog they aren't likely to adopt out, or that needs a lot of work, they're full, take it to the HS. I've even heard that the rescues have dropped their dogs off but it's not official because that's the HS's policy.

Pot meet kettle.

The HS has a lot of funding, a vet clinic, a building and staff.....

And round and round. Funny thing is I know people on all three sides and they all still love dogs, mixed or not.

[sillysally]

See, I really haven't had a lot of bad "real life" experiences with rescue people. I'm good friends with a woman who runs a dobe/all breed rescue who does massage and swim therapy with Jack, and she has a "breeder" dog as well as rescues and fosters. At the same training facility is another rescue volunteer who has several rescue dogs and recently got an Aussie from a good breeder and is planning on doing confo with him. There is also a trainer there who does white shepherd rescue and has a white shepherd that she shows.

I have a dog from a breeder and a dog that is a rescue and I get way more negative comments about their breeds (lab/bully breed) than I do where they came from. The only really nutty people I've seen on either "side" have been on the internet. I think the majority of people involved in rescue are normal dog lovers who are not out to send breeders death threats, but rather to help out where they can.

The only really bad rescue I know of in this area is a horse rescue.

[Flyinsbt]

Originally Posted by Fran101

I especially like this bit
"We’re AWFUL. We need to stop loving our incestuous little group of perfect dogs and JUST FRELLING LOVE DOGS. We can still own dogs, still show them, still breed them. Go to Hermes and bring home the bag that your heart dreams of. But for pete’s sake, high-five somebody who has a different bag. "

See, I didn't like that bit, because I thought it was stupid. Who in dogs doesn't love them? (And I don't even totally get the bag analogy, because I know nothing about them, and care less.) But seriously, she may know people who are that obsessed with perfect purebred dogs, but the people I know in dogs are not like that.

[AdrianneIsabel]

Maybe she hates dogs, maybe her friends (frenemies), maybe her breed, maybe her area, but certainly not in my world. I refuse to associate as more than a networking acquaintance with people who produce so much gossipy hatred for those around them nor those who treat their dogs as livestock. Sure, these people exist, but I do not believe they are the majority and painting these sweeping generalizations on common folk defeats the point.

[Sekah]

Originally Posted by Flyinsbt

See, I didn't like that bit, because I thought it was stupid. Who in dogs doesn't love them? (And I don't even totally get the bag analogy, because I know nothing about them, and care less.) But seriously, she may know people who are that obsessed with perfect purebred dogs, but the people I know in dogs are not like that.

I would say that I love my dog, but I don't have a deep love for all dogs. I find them interesting, I adore learning theory and behaviourism, but I'm no bleeding heart for dogs I don't know, or breeds of which I'm not fond. I can imagine plenty of people who are involved with dogs but don't love them all unequivocally.

[Flyinsbt]

Originally Posted by Sekah

I would say that I love my dog, but I don't have a deep love for all dogs. I find them interesting, I adore learning theory and behaviourism, but I'm no bleeding heart for dogs I don't know, or breeds of which I'm not fond. I can imagine plenty of people who are involved with dogs but don't love them all unequivocally.

I don't think you have to love them all equally, but the people I know in dogs do love dogs in general. There might be breeds they aren't as fond of, but it's easy to squee over a puppy. And there isn't any snobbish "this dog isn't fancy enough to win a show" sort of not liking.

When, on a SBT board, someone posted photos of her litter including a black & tan pup (a disqualification here, and a serious fault in the UK, where the pup was born), everyone squeed over the black and tan. Because it was cute. Who cares she'd never make a show dog, we all loved her! My own first SBT had wonky ears and no testicles, and he was very popular in the breed. I wrote a lot about him, and everyone appreciated his character.

A person I know in another breed has a couple of scruffy looking mixed breeds that she wound up with because she fostered them after being called as potentials for one of the breeds she owns (they aren't), and seems to be incapable of having a dog in her house without keeping it. One of them, she said the temperament wasn't sound enough to place, but considering she later got another dog of her breed because she "borrowed" it to make competition for her show dog, and then decided to keep it ("I always wanted one this color"), I think she just can't have temporary dogs. She gets too attached.

Maybe the snobbish people described exist, but I really don't think it's the bulk of show dog people.

[JessLough]

Originally Posted by AdrianneIsabel

Maybe she hates dogs, maybe her friends (frenemies), maybe her breed, maybe her area, but certainly not in my world. I refuse to associate as more than a networking acquaintance with people who produce so much gossipy hatred for those around them nor those who treat their dogs as livestock. Sure, these people exist, but I do not believe they are the majority and painting these sweeping generalizations on common folk defeats the point.

This. Let's face it, most people don't go around talking about how so and so rescue has such a great adoption process and has adopted out ____ dogs or whatever good things. They go around and repeat the bad things, because it's "more interesting" and it's better remembered. So what you will hear about are the bad things. For every bad story you hear, there's a hundred good ones not being spread around.