"_____" breed is not like other dogs!

True fact.

And also how I feel about Daisy lol

:hail:

Yeah, I dislike the attitude " my breed is too difficult, only the most special can handle them!" It not people on this forum, but I find that a lot of working dog people have this smug attitude. Yes, most people wouldn't want to deal with true working breeds, but don't feel yourself better because of it.

I think it is all about the "what I don't want to deal with" and "what I can't handle." Too different statements that tend to get mix up. I would admit that there are lot of breeds that I don't want to deal with. I don't want to deal with maintaining a Puli's coat, or deal with the size of a Mastiff or the stubbornness of a Basenji. That doesn't mean I can't handle them. I just would prefer not too! There are a few breeds that I feel like I couldn't handle, like the caucasian ovcharka, and that is partly because I would never live in an environment suitable for it(city living for me).

This. If the most difficult breed ended up on my doorstop and I decided to keep it, I would adapt to that dog's needs. Whether it is dealing with a Mali, dealing with a Puli, or dealing with a Basenji.

To me, no breed is like any other breed. Otherwise why do we have breeds?

Heavens, yes. I had two instances when Gusto was young, and people would ask me what he was ("Half border collie, half we-don't-know"), and they would look pointedly at me (I'm overweight) and say that there was no way I was going to handle him when he was older. These were non-agility, random pet people I didn't know. I'm pretty sure the daily training and 1 to 3 hours of off leash exercise my dogs get nearly every day is more than most pet people give their dogs.

I used to find it annoying when people would start in on their "but my breed is more special than most" spiels. Interestingly enough, I see it less in the real world and more in the online world. We certainly see it on this board. I don't think there is a single person who means it in an unkind or hurtful way, and it is never phrased that way.

But I came to a conclusion. *Every* dog deserves to have someone who thinks they are the most spectacular, individual, unique, fantastic creature to touch the earth. It isn't meant to take away from other dogs, or to look down upon the people who don't have them. It is simply a way of honoring what is so special about the dogs we know. So I now smile when I see that border collies/mexidogs/filas/whatever are so different and special and I just don't get it.

Because I know the real truth. Rescue dogs have something so unique about them, and such a different bond with their owner than dogs who were purchased, and if you don't have one, you don't get it

Never a truer word spoken.

What is so very wrong with pride?

We're all different and that is why so many different types of dogs exist.

I know my limits and I would promptly find a home for a dog not suited here in an effort to benefit them, I know that I'm not designed to make every type of dog the happiest it can be and not every type of dog is designed for my lifestyle. I don't honestly think people are doing dogs any favors saying they don't feel the need to research breed/type needs and select 15 yr long companions based on such needs and desires.

I think, unfortunately, you are in the minority there. Hence the huge population of dogs in the shelter- a lot of people don't adapt to the needs of dogs they choose to bring into their homes.

Luce was a huge eye-opener for me when I brought her home. I got way more dog than I was expecting. It is who I am to adapt, to grow, to learn how to meet her needs. But most of the casual dog owners I know? Wouldn't have.

Very well said. What someone CAN do and what someone WANTS to do are very, very different things.

Well it's a good thing no one is advocating that people do that, then. Not sure where that even came from in the context of this discussion, honestly.


For me it has nothing to do with pride or arrogance or being insulting or anything like that, it's just that really who knows what kind of dog might click with what kind of person? If I had been on Chaz before I got Squash, I wonder how many people would have told me I couldn't handle a working line Alaskan cross being a middle aged fatty living in the city with no previous mushing experience. And yet here I am with an awesome dog I adore enjoying a new sport I wouldn't have otherwise.

No breed is so special that only a very elite subset of dog owners can handle them or can't adapt to them. It's far more about the owner and their willingness to adapt and be flexible and be clear about what they do and don't WANT to handle than any particular breed of dog IMO.

My response was directly connected to the post I quoted.

I am surprised so many on this forum have gotten and care about people's concerns and warnings dealing with breeds. Sometimes I really think people misunderstand, a lot.

I specifically said that ime kelpies are not the easiest, most ideal breed for sports that benefit from biddability of training as opposed to shaping instinct. I did not say "you cannot handle this breed and cannot go far with this breed." I worry however people seem to think one statement means the other.

When someone says they want a mal but hate dogs that follow you with their noses up your butt and I say this breed is doubtfully ideal for you then it is for the benefit of the situation, not some form of snarky snobbery.

When I post "tell me about tollers, deerhounds, whippets, and _____" I want genuine reasoning to see why this breed may or may not suit me. I don't take offense if someone says," you seem to prefer biddable dogs, be aware this breed can be hard to bargain with."

Maybe this is far more about sensitivity and semantics than breeds and suitability.

Hmmm, honestly I'm not really seeing how you got from A to B in response to that post.

Those aren't the kind of statements I'm personally talking about.

This, to a certain extent... If you told me as a kid I'd be a coonhunter, I'd have cried & told you it was cruel if you asked me what I actually WANTED before we got Eerie, I'd have said a standard poodle. My plotts are nothing like my standard was, but they are my breed, and now I am a coonhunting, dog-showing, fool

We're either reading different statements or misunderstanding the same statements.

The good thing is I don't think anyone disagrees that it's rude to presume you know someone and the type of dog they can own without making an effort to explore their lifestyle.

And just to be clear, I'm not like... personally insulted, or laying awake at night seething or shaking my fist at anyone. Certain statements make me roll my eyes before moving along, but since this is a thread about it, well, that's what I'm talking about here.

^ This.

This isn't really what I was personally talking about in the OP. I think learning about a breed before jumping right into it is very important and making sure a breed fits your wants and needs. And nothing wrong with warning about what may be considered faults, and stuff, either.

If there's a thread about a specific breed and people are asking about it in terms of training, biddability, drive, health, temperament, etc, of course it's important to point out the facts and what you may or may not want to live with.

My original post kind of stemmed from what MandyPug was talking about...

Ps- I know (don't think) your post was directed at me but just wanted to clear up where my thoughts were coming from

^ this too.

Some people think their breed or their dog is not like any other dog fundamentally. They speak of them as though they're not in any way similar to other dogs. Of course there are many, many breeds with specialized traits that vary tremendously. That's why we have so many various breeds. But they're still dogs and those basic things that differentiate dogs from other species are still present (or absent) in all domestic dogs. I think sometimes people seem to be blind to that...perhaps because they thrive on idea of uniqueness.

I mostly find it irritating when people imply that "average dog owners" couldn't possibly handle a high energy/high drive dog.

I consider myself an average dog owner, and most of my friends with dogs are average as well. We feed our dogs good/decent food, we keep them clean/groomed, take them to the vet when sick, make sure they're adequately exercised, and love them with all our heart. We might not partake in dog sports, or compete in obedience or anything like that, but that does not automatically make us unsuitable or a terrible home for a high drive/high energy dog. Without time, energy or commitment, then yes, the dog would probably not do well, but assuming an "average dog owner" isn't willing to adapt to the situation is silly.

This is really an interesting discussion. #approval

All breeds are different but I do believe that all of their behaviors and traits till fall into "being a normal dog." I think the term DOG covers a wide range. Animal first > Dog > Breed > Individual. Makes sense to me.

I weigh the "XYZ breed is different" based on the context. It is a little maddening to have an owner tell you that a solution isn't going to work simply because of the breed of dog involved. I have a rough feel for all dogs, and I've found that having good dog sense will serve you far greater overall than knowing the intricate minutiae of each breed. If a bit of breed trivia is more impressive than a lot of dog knowledge, then somebody is missing the point! Lol! It is okay to have your favorite breed; I personally love a lot of breeds but am only interested in owning one. But if all you see is breed, that's a really narrow picture, like only looking out your front windshield when you drive and never checking mirrors or your side.

On the other hand, to echo what Adrianne said (especially since we are talking about one of the same breeds), there are things that someone needs to know if they are going to be dealing extensively with certain breeds, stuff that a lot of people aren't going to be ready for if they don't embrace breed individuality. The dog-aggression and fighting skill are kind of a big deal with my breed. Many dogs can be dog-aggro, but only a few breeds were expressly bred to be very good at fighting contact. I believe that enough DOG knowledge will serve a potential owner better than just BREED knowledge when going into an APBT or anything else, but I also think that any dog-sensible person is going to want to research the breed as well. That's just good policy.

My two dogs kind of illustrate dog vs. breed (at least to me). Loki is a good dog. She can run off-leash and mostly stay in the yard, is not generally hankering for a fight, chases squirrels and rabbits but comes right back, greets humans politely, sensitive to touch, requires motivating to work, doesn't really jump up, etc. She is much like the neighbor's Lab with a little more drive. (Lab is a puppy, and their training seems to be mostly teaching him to sit, stay in the yard, and not do anything.) I took her to dock diving practice first before I dare to take little Terra because I know she will be far more tolerant of the foibles of other dogs. Now Terra is a good Pit Bull. She likes to kill things, is rarely on her behavior with other dogs (although she's a lot less straight-ahead than other dog-aggro Pit Bulls), has a lot of toy drive, pulls on the leash, reactive, high pain threshhold, very responsive in training, glompy with people, etc. As a "general dog" she is a pain in the rear. Now admittedly, part of the difference is age and training. But part of it is also genetics. Terra is bred down from much more old-school stock where Loki is more AmStaff and a bit more acceptable in the modern expectation of canine behavior.

There is nothing wrong with being proud of your accomplishments. It when you take those accomplishments and act as if your some kind of special snow flake because of the dog you own is where the problem is at. Back then in Chaz, there was a member (she no longer post here) who felt herself and her working dogs were better than the people and pets here to the point where she even said that working dogs were the "REAL" dogs, and pets dogs were just ornaments.

Keep in mind that I made sure to say "if I decide to keep it." If a dog of a breed that I rather not handle ends up on my doorstep, I'm not just going to keep it outside and hope someone else gets it. I'm going to bring it inside and adapt to its needs while it here, and I might decide to keep it if I fell in love. For example, there was a Min Pin who I found running around in the streets so I took it home with me. Now, Min Pins were dogs I decided long ago I would rather not deal with. They were barkers, very small, and one person type dogs. The time I had the dog while I was looking for the owner, I feel in love. The dog would bark before meal ties, bark when we were about to take a walk, and bark at the door, and to my surprise found it very enduring rather than the annoyed feeling that I expected it. The small size that I thought I didn't want, actually found it easier to adjust to sitautions with a dog that size. I love how the dg just becae attach to me and not anyone else in the household. We found the dog's owner but gosh darn I miss that little dog.

This isn't about not researching a dog before you get one. No one here said anything about getting a breed without research. Of course there are dogs who better suit your needs and like I said in the past post, there are dogs who I kow I can handle but dont want to handle, and there are few dogs I just can't handle at all. If a caucasian ovcharka (thank god this is unlikely) ended up on my doorstep, no matter how much I like it, I'm going to find it another home. Not only do I think I couldn't handle such a huge dog with large guardian instinct, I would never live in a place suitable for it.

I don't think I'm the minority of dog owners. See, there are people who are dog owners, and there are people who were never meant to be dog owners. The peope who weren't meant to be dog owners didn't find that out until they have a pup and find out they have no will to take care of it. An example of that is one of my neighbors who brought a little dog. After awhile, she didn't want to deal with his needs at all. I took care of the dog many times, and that dog was the most easiest dog I've ever own. The dog would only have accidents in the house if he wasn't walk, it wasn't crazy active, it just needed a good walk, the dog was quiet in the house, had no aggressive issues and wasn't fearful, and he was pretty smart. Yet she found it difficult. I don't consier her a dog owner just because she own a dog. She did not deserve the title. Thankfully, she gave it to a humane society.

Real dog owners, those who love the responsibilities of taking care of a dog, ARE very adaptable. A dog, no matter where you get that dog from, is never perfect. In some cases, events can cause an otherwise easy dog to become difficult. For example, a golden retriever who loved every dog he meets, suddent becomes dog reactive and dog aggressive after an attack. Most dog owners, for the love of that dog, would deal with those issues and try to fix it or tame it down. Yes, there are times when some issues are too much and the dog is rehome. Still, most dog owners would be able to adapt to fit a dog's needs.

I don't know quite how to define "average," but I don't think you're an average dog owner. Most people on this forum are probably to some degree or another more dog savvy than Joe Schmoe average dog owner out there...at least to the point of understanding that it takes a little research to know what you're doing.

I believe that there are real risks involved with a lot of Joe Schmoe average dog owners out there with certain breeds of dogs. I've seen too many disasters with clients and neighbors etc with dogs like Dobermans, Rottweilers and some other high drive, high energy working breeds and as we see, Pit bull types where people don't take into account their tendency toward dog aggression etc. (just as examples) A lot of dogs are definitely too much for people who are not willing to put in the time to understand their breed of dog or even understand dogs in general. They make terrible mistakes with them. And the mistakes made with certain breeds of dogs can be more disastrous than with other breeds. Dobermans, for instance can be ticking time bombs in the wrong hands. So, when someone says that some breed of dog probably isn't the best for so and so, there can definitely be a point there. It's not meaning necessarily that the person can't learn about the breed and how to handle it but if they're your "average Joe Schmoe" who doesn't take anything into consideration, there are breeds and even individuals that are obviously too much for them. We see it all the time in the way of terrible behavior problems, dangerous dogs and miserably unhappy dogs.