Breeding for sports

Oh, thanks for the edit. It should be "no reason to NOT adapt... blah blah."

I used to be so against it. Especially the sport mixes. Sports are a purpose aren't they??

For me it's advertisement... agility people don't usually claim their dogs are more correct for the breed than working lines. Also, I think they usually health test. If people bred a line of GSDs that weighed 38 lbs and had very little instinct to protect... I'd rather they called them something else (but at this point with GSDs, I'm not really sure one more type would matter lol).

I mean, take King Shepherds:
http://www.kingshepherdclubinternational.com/index.html
I'm sure that description rubs some people the wrong way, but I can't see why.

Pretty much this. If the person is making sure that their dogs are in appropriate homes, and is willing to provide life-long support, then they are not part of the "problem". And if their dogs are not ending up in shelters or bad situations, I'm not too bothered.

There will always be breeders who are focusing heavily on the standard and "preserving" the breed (however much it may not be preserving the actual origins of the breed).

15 lbs Paps sound perfect to me. I couldn't own a tiny one. I'd break it.

Yeah you're right, I'm pretty sure that's it.

The Shiloh Shepherd site is even worse
http://www.shilohshepherds.org/

Oh, I don't have any problem with the King shepherd. They had their vision (GSD with some modifications), so that's what they bred for, gave it a new name, simply stated that the GSD in its present form isn't what they wanted... ta da, done!!

I find the Shiloh shepherd description cringe worthy.

I know a ton of **GSD** owners who think this is what all GSDs are... makes my stomach churn.

Omg the Shiloh Shepherd thing... Like they're a "better" GSD, because, you know, they're really supposed to be giant, laid back, and lack natural aggression.

And just never mind the whole, "They don't have 'sloping backs' or 'bad hips'!" when for one thing they really mean rear angulation and for another, rear angulation varies and it's certainly possible to find a moderate GSD. ARGH

Oh, right, we're talking about breeding for sports. :rofl1: Yeah, I don't really care. If I don't like the dogs they produce, I don't buy them. Realistically, breeders need to keep an eye on all aspects (structure and yes, type) of the dogs they produce to be worthwhile for me, but I will always prioritize ability and temperament and sound structure. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing for breeders to use performance sports as a barometer and goal for their dogs.

I just mean if I'm looking for a dog that might jump in the 16" class I want one that has a better chance of being a comfortable height for that class. For 16", shelties are perfect. Some measure over yes but the majority fall within the limits. I wouldn't want a pap that may be just over that 12" cutoff (its even shorter for ifcs worlds too, 11" and change I think for that class). I'd want a dog more in the 14-15" range to jump in the 16" class and I can't imagine having a pap that big! Izzie is only just over 12".

The big thing around here for sport mixes are the longhaired whippet/border collies. Very nice dogs though, they health test and all that (at least their first few litters they did).

I personally would not buy from a breeder deliberately breeding outside of the standard for no other reason than sport. If I'm going to get a dog from a breeder rather than adopt, I want the whole package, and for me type is part of that package.

Part of me feels this way ..then I remember Penn isn't breed standard so I'm not sure. I have nothing to add other than it's something I've thought about before!

Well there's a difference between having an issue with the breeder breeding what they do, and simply choosing to not get a dog from them. I wouldn't get dogs from almost every breeder out there, overall, but I don't necessarily have an issue with their breeding practices. They just aren't producing what I seek.

Agreed. It is entirely possible I will *never* get a dog from a breeder, just because I keep happening upon ideal rescues, but I can still not have an issue with what a breeder is doing.

In my breed, I would rather see a breeder breeding for the instinct and ability the dog was originally created for (working). I think they are such fantastic dogs I hate to see them change (usually for the worse in terms of drive/nerve). I've seen so many fantastic dogs come from solely working parents and go on to be great in the sport world.

That being said, I think it's very cool when breeders will preserve the instinct/work ethic these dogs were created for some many years ago, but also dabble in other 'newer' sports (like agility, dock diving, rally, etc). Work instinct is the primary focus (because it just creates such great dogs, IME) but sports aren't a bad thing.

That being said, I echo what Shai posted above. There is a difference between buying from someone and not agreeing with what they breed for. I'm sure there are plenty of sport breeders out there producing healthy, stable dogs. But would I buy from/support them? No, they're not producing what I like for the breed. But do they have bad breeding habits? No. Just not what I would like/want for the breed.

Honestly, as long as the best interests of the dog (health, temperament, structure, breeders keep track of pups and screen owners) I don't like it but am not going to lose sleep over it. However would not consider buying from that breeder.

Well, I guess I'm a bit of a rebel, but I don't approve of breeding outside the standard, or deliberate crossbreeds, for sport. For legitimate work, sure. But not for sport. Sports are a game, and while it's not unreasonable to consider these abilities in breeding, I can't condone breeding with that as the sole goal.

My standpoint comes as a Stafford owner/occasional breeder. I love this breed, and I love to compete in agility. I could breed dogs who were better suited to agility, but then they wouldn't really be Staffords, would they? I might as well just get a BC or a Sheltie if what I want is an agility dog. We have different breeds for a reason.

And the fact is, the Staffords that are bred specifically as "sport" dogs tend to be less than sound. There may be sport breeders in other breeds who pay some attention to structure, and not just drive, but I don't see it in this breed.

My own dogs are bred partly for their sporting abilities, but I also consider whether they meet the breed standard. Not whether they can win in the ring, as that doesn't always have to do with meeting breed standard. But they do need to have the characteristics of the breed, and I do get outside people (who know what they are talking about) to evaluate my dogs, rather than risk becoming kennel blind.

If someone really can't find what they want within an existing breed, there are many great mixed breeds available who would be excellent sport dogs.

I'm not going to run around dissing people who do breed solely for sport, because I'm not dictator of the world. But it's not something I approve of.

Well, I have two sport-bred Border Collies, so I guess that answers that question. Neither is really "outside of the standard" but they'd look crazy out of place in the breed ring, especially Steve. BUt I love their drive and their enthusiasm. I regularly see people complain that sport dog breeders are breeding dogs who are too high, and maybe that is so, but I love my dogs, even STeven James who probably *is* what eople would consider "too high

Op mentioned about the original purpose of the pap, what is it?



imo all breeds would benefit if we dropped the notion of "purebred", it has clearly caused the demise of the working breeds and just become a licence to print money.

I dont think purebred is what lead to the end of working dogs, i really think society not needing working dogs is what lead to the end of them. I personally dont like the seperation in some breeds, field labs vs. show labs, working shepherds vs. show shepherds, etc. BUT I dont feel purposely causing that is the answer, so I am against breeding outside of the standard.

Having said that I dont agree with how breeding for show only has wrecked several breeds. I feel that it would be better for breeds to be able to go right from the sport ring to the show ring. I think most average pet owners want a lab that looks like a lab, but that can still retrieve, swim and go with you all day, or happily lay at your feet all day.

Few average families can handle a working bred dog, they dont have the time or ability to deal with a dog that NEEDS to go all day long, and is smarter then your average 3 year old, LMAO.

This is why I am 100% for breeders who do conformation and performance titles on their dogs. (as well as health testing of course)