Dog Site - Dog Stuff
Dog Forum | Dog Pictures

Go Back   Chazhound Dog Forum > Dog Discussions and Dog Talk Forums > The Breeding Ground


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 05-05-2011, 12:40 PM
Psyfalcon Psyfalcon is offline
Fishies!
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,372
Default

Height, could be a problem in the field with Beagles. You want them to run under as many thorns as possible. Still, I don't know why standards insist on having height as a DQ. If 14 inches is ideal, and 15 inches is ok, why would 15.5 be the end of the world?
__________________
Buster
PhotoBlog
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-05-2011, 12:56 PM
mom2dogs mom2dogs is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dekka View Post
Unless a judge is incompetent (which happens) they shouldnt' be tricked by a pretty hair do.
Judges know, some aren't incompetent (some are ) but they will put up what they want to put up on that day. The ones who can easily hide the faults to a T are the ones who generally have trimming down and understand the concept of what you can do with layers, etc... thus the dogs often look better, usually presented better, and those will win most of the time over the ones who do not do as good of a job in the grooming department, handling department, etc. regardless of if it's better than the dog "with the pretty hair do." Why do you think so many hire handlers?

I love showing, I just don't think it's the be all end all in seeing how well a dog conforms to the standard

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dekka
I also like rules that state dogs must be mature. Not just for people to breed too. But lets say a breeder finishes a lot of their dogs as pups and pets them out. Looks good for their 'stats'. But is it because their dogs are good, or just are better as puppies?
There is a breeder in my breed that does this (most of the puppies she breeds must be finished, regardless of if it'll end up a pet). Word travels, people form opinions. It's not because all of her puppies turn ugly, either.

What's to stop ugly (I use the term nicely ), but older, dogs from finishing either? Because it happens all. the. time.

Last edited by mom2dogs; 05-05-2011 at 01:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-05-2011, 05:56 PM
Romy's Avatar
Romy Romy is offline
Taxiderpy
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 10,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mom2dogs View Post
Judges know, some aren't incompetent (some are ) but they will put up what they want to put up on that day. The ones who can easily hide the faults to a T are the ones who generally have trimming down and understand the concept of what you can do with layers, etc... thus the dogs often look better, usually presented better, and those will win most of the time over the ones who do not do as good of a job in the grooming department, handling department, etc. regardless of if it's better than the dog "with the pretty hair do." Why do you think so many hire handlers?

I love showing, I just don't think it's the be all end all in seeing how well a dog conforms to the standard



There is a breeder in my breed that does this (most of the puppies she breeds must be finished, regardless of if it'll end up a pet). Word travels, people form opinions. It's not because all of her puppies turn ugly, either.

What's to stop ugly (I use the term nicely ), but older, dogs from finishing either? Because it happens all. the. time.
Yeah, you see it a lot in borzois. Especially with all breed judges. It's very common for an all breed judge to put up 4-5 year old males just because they carry a ton of coat. I've seen some really fantastic younger dogs passed over so an older dog that does the eggbeater paddle thing with front and back feet as it walks can get put up.

Sight hound breeder judges tend to pick much better, more consistently. They realize that the topline you see in the ring is totally disguising their true topline.

It's one of the reasons highly ranked smooth collies tend to have better structure than highly ranked roughs. You can conceal an awful lot of faults with that coat and a fantastic presentation that you'd never get away with on a smooth.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-05-2011, 06:52 PM
UniquityBelgians UniquityBelgians is offline
Big Dog
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 164
Default

I don't see anything wrong with it. As long as the dogs are healthy with good structure and temperament -- who cares if there's a "chance" of some, one, or no puppies being oversize? It's all a crapshoot. One of my best friends breeds shelties; The females she breeds are always between 12 and 14 inches; The males are never more than 15 inches. 16 is DQ. She gets puppies anywhere from 11 to 19 inches (many times in the same litter). When you're dealing with a breed that has multiple sizes in it's genetic makeup, you're bound to get a mix sometimes.
Cosmetic faults are really just cosmetic. NO dog is perfect. Not every puppy in a litter is going to be perfect, and most breeders are not able to put a Ch on every puppy in a litter for one reason or another. If the reason is a little more predicatable, oh well, you're prepared.
I see so many dogs in the show ring that don't have faults "according to standard" but still have terrible structure, and many have health issues. People should be more willing to get the risk of an oversized puppy than the risk of a serious health problem. If a dog is a bit tall, a bit small, has a blue eye, a drop ear, a curly tail, the wrong colour.... Does it affect the health? The temperament? The working ability?? Than, what's wrong?
__________________
~Jordan and the Uniquity Belgians
www.uniquitybelgianshepherds.com
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-05-2011, 09:03 PM
Romy's Avatar
Romy Romy is offline
Taxiderpy
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 10,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UniquityBelgians View Post
I don't see anything wrong with it. As long as the dogs are healthy with good structure and temperament -- who cares if there's a "chance" of some, one, or no puppies being oversize? It's all a crapshoot. One of my best friends breeds shelties; The females she breeds are always between 12 and 14 inches; The males are never more than 15 inches. 16 is DQ. She gets puppies anywhere from 11 to 19 inches (many times in the same litter). When you're dealing with a breed that has multiple sizes in it's genetic makeup, you're bound to get a mix sometimes.
Cosmetic faults are really just cosmetic. NO dog is perfect. Not every puppy in a litter is going to be perfect, and most breeders are not able to put a Ch on every puppy in a litter for one reason or another. If the reason is a little more predicatable, oh well, you're prepared.
I see so many dogs in the show ring that don't have faults "according to standard" but still have terrible structure, and many have health issues. People should be more willing to get the risk of an oversized puppy than the risk of a serious health problem. If a dog is a bit tall, a bit small, has a blue eye, a drop ear, a curly tail, the wrong colour.... Does it affect the health? The temperament? The working ability?? Than, what's wrong?
All of this too. ^^ Personally I'd take a dog that was slightly over or under sized, yet had beautiful angulation and the correct substance over a dog with a crappier shoulder or unbalanced angles but was within the height standard. Yeah height can be disqualifying depending on breed, but which is the bigger fault?

Same thing with something like a blue eye. If the dog had the right lines, the right health, temperament, etc. and was better than its siblings, I'd probably breed it despite a blue eye. Those are recessive, just be careful about line breeding and it shouldn't become an issue.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-05-2011, 10:36 PM
pitbullpony's Avatar
pitbullpony pitbullpony is offline
BSL Can Be Beaten
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: ON, CAN
Posts: 711
Default

Hmm; what's your market want?

Are they the people that will conf ch their dog as a puppy; then go out and hunt happily with the dog for the rest of it's life; not worrying about height dq/faults.

Or

are they pet people who don't care either way

Or

are they hardcore perfectionists who aren't going to overlook any faults and that is all you have on your pup list? And do you offer height as a guarantee? And can you guarantee a pup's future height as a baby? i.e. Big puppy = big adult?

IF I was left with group three and looking for future breeding stock for myself and I was serious about lead and feed criteria; I'd look for the smaller male; if I had the other people as puppy prospective owners; I'd go with hunting ability, temperament, health, and let the height chips fall where they may.
__________________

Jennifer Sider First Dog Off the Porch Custom Collars
Mom to Mitchell, Avalon, Ninja, Jiggs and Misty
Life is forever and everything is just an experience on the road to enlightenment.

Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-09-2011, 02:34 PM
DobeLove DobeLove is offline
Big Dog
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Washington
Posts: 151
Default

Interesting thread.

I agree height is not a big concern, but there is better choices out there. You could breed your bitch to Louie to begin with. But if you don't, you could breed one of the puppies (using that term loosely) that was in standard, even after fully mature.

I think there is usually a reason for a DQ, the breed clubs don't just make them up for fun. And even if an oversized bitch was bred to an in standard dog, doesn't mean you will get in between. You still can get an oversized dog. Then would you breed the over sized dogs again?

Last edited by DobeLove; 05-09-2011 at 03:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-09-2011, 03:05 PM
Dekka's Avatar
Dekka Dekka is online now
Just try me..
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ontario
Posts: 19,517
Default

Disqualifying faults are often made up for no real reason, or reason other than politics. Take my favourite example tollers here is the breed standared:NSDTR Club of Canada - Toller Standard

to quote the disqualifying faults
Quote:
Disqualification
1. White on shoulders, around ears, on back of neck, across back or flanks.
2. Silvery coat, grey in coat, black areas in coat.
3. Lack of webbing.
4. Undershot bite, wry mouth.
5. In adult classes, any shyness.
6. Butterfly nose.
7. Overshot by more than 1/8 inch.
8. Any colour other than red or orange shades.
The bolded one is of interest. This is a fairly new fault. Why did they make this a fault? It doesn't affect the health, temperament, or working ability of the toller. You can't say well its historical, as it used to be just fine..... So ya seems it was made 'just for fun' or for politics, which is the same thing.

(its not even directly inheritable which makes it even sillier)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DobeLove View Post
Interesting thread.

You will most likely get 50/50. Then would you breed the over sized dogs again?
Actually no its not that simple. Height is (in most mammals anyway, dogs humans and horses for sure) polygenic so you can't say 50/50. Even if it was a single trait it would then be dominant and recessive, so only 50/50 if it was oversized and the dog was heterozygous. And if that was the case it would be really simple to breed back out.

This is why I think anyone who wants to breed should take a few courses or educate themselves not only on how inheritance works, but what many common issues are genetically (ie recessive, dominant, polygenetic, or epistatic... maybe even epigenetic)
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-09-2011, 03:18 PM
DobeLove DobeLove is offline
Big Dog
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Washington
Posts: 151
Default

I don't know every DQ for every breed, but it seems like for Beagles the height there is a reason for the DQ. (Someone said it helps them avoid thorns while hunting?) I agree the white on tollers is stupid.

I edited my original post to take out the 50/50 because that is not what I meant. I don't know anything about genetics. I was trying to say that you can still get an oversized dog even if you breed an oversized to an undersized, you most likely will still get small dogs or large dogs. You breed for what you want, if your dog has a soft topline, you aren't going to breed to a dog that has a roachy topline, you would breed to one that has a solid topline...

I still think it's wrong to be breeding dogs with a disqualifying fault. Especially when it would be easy to avoid it.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-09-2011, 03:25 PM
Dekka's Avatar
Dekka Dekka is online now
Just try me..
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ontario
Posts: 19,517
Default

Why is it wrong? (in the case of DQ being strictly cosmetic) Isn't the goal the betterment of the breed? And it only helps them avoid the thorns if you have low thorns. One of my best friends is an avid hunter. I can tell you for sure that a slightly higher dog isn't going to be a detriment. And after all isn't a beagle supposed to be a hunting dog? The height thing is a range imposed by kennel clubs.

This is the reason the PRT is not the same size as the JRT. No kennel club will accept 10-15 inches as a height range in a small dog (I got this directly from kennel club officials) So the PRT had to make less than 12 inches a DQ. Not because its good for the breed, not because it aids in health or temperament. And it directly impairs the working ability of the breed. So are you saying a stunning but slightly smaller dog should not be bred, simply to match what is written on paper?

In the scheme of things I would rather see dogs who are cosmetically less perfect when compared to the paper ideal but are better examples of the breed.
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 10:14 AM.


1997-2013 Chazhound Dog Site