Dog Site - Dog Stuff
Dog Forum | Dog Pictures

Go Back   Chazhound Dog Forum > Dog Discussions and Dog Talk Forums > Dogs - General Dog Chat


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 01-06-2013, 04:39 PM
Aleron's Avatar
Aleron Aleron is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,270
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shai View Post
This is the key part for me. If there were sufficient jobs and breeders to maintain genetic diversity in the breeds by only breeding top workers who performed their historical jobs then fine, I'm in. But there are very, very few breeds in which that is true.

I "live" in a breed for whom the lack of genetic diversity is the biggest problem. It's the reason for the cancer issues. Genetic heterogeneity is incredibly important in the body's fight to keep itself healthy, so when folks start talking about artificially eliminating large segments of their breeding population over something like not having access to a large farm and huge numbers of livestock (some herding breeds), a name (this K/Coolie debate), coat type (Belgian Shepherds in the U.S.), it makes me a big sick to my stomach. Establish a line, breed what you want, but splintering into infinite discrete shards is not healthy for the breeds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shai View Post
In the current construct of "purebred", especially for those breeds working within the popular registry systems, those segments of your population which have been rejected for political or aesthetic purposes may be your only option one day when you find yourself in a genetic corner and needing diversity. I would give just about anything to find a pool of FCRs somewhere in the world with a set of genes largely bred out of our current population who were healthy. And frankly I don't care if they've allowed yellows to breed or haven't retrieved a duck in six generations...we HAVE that...the burning desire to retrieve anything and everyone to their people would not be wiped out with careful intelligent outcrossing...and it would be more than worth it to get that diversity back in our breed.
I so agree! My friend is involved with PWDs and has been since the early 90s. That breed is in a similar situation, where there's just no where to go to within the breed's population and a very small gene pool. I always think how awesome it would be for there to be native, unregistered PWDs that could be brought in...like there was with Basenjis. Most breeds aren't that lucky though

With Belgians, we are lucky in that we can import dogs and register them as what they are. This gives a possibility for greater genetic diversity in the dogs in the US than there used to be (it used to be 3 generations of "pure" according to AKC breeding). Denise Fenzi's AKC registered Tervs are out of working Malinois lines. I just wish one of the varieties didn't have epilepsy as a concern, that would be so awesome. But yeah from the standpoint of a breed that is split in AKC but really shouldn't be...I don't understand the desire to split off into new breeds because different people are selecting for different things. A lot of white GSD people seem to want to split into a new breed, some have already taken steps in that direction. I understand they want to show but...is that really worth limiting your gene pool so much? Belgians were basically split in the US for show too and it really wasn't the right thing for the breed...or breeds. Really varieties. They should have been AKC varieties, like Collies are. People could opt to keep their "pure" lines of whatever variety or do inter-variety breeding. Intervariety breeding goes on now anyway and there's already tons of AKC registered dogs with IV breeding in their pedigrees, even out of IV breedings done outside of the US (with littermates also AKC registered...as different breeds).
__________________
Nikki & the Herding Breed Variety Pack
Visit Us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Alerondogs
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-07-2013, 12:53 PM
meepitsmeagan's Avatar
meepitsmeagan meepitsmeagan is online now
Meagan&TheCattleDogCrew
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Southwest Michigan
Posts: 2,769
Default

I don't see any problems with diversifying a breed by having sport breeders, working breeders, ect (assuming they are health testing, blah, blah). However, I don't like the idea of a sport breeder being SO involved in sports that they have completely bred out any instinct. I don't want to see a sport bred BC or Aussie thrown in with sheep and looking like "WTF do I do with these?" I also don't want to see a working breeder be so immersed in my dog has to be a superior herder, but that dog couldn't function in the real world.

I realize a lot of breeds these days are not used for what they were originally bred for, and probably never will be. But, I think it would be nice to preserve a lot of the original intent for the breed. Could Harlow go and pin down a wild boar or a bison? I'm honestly not sure, but I'm thinking probably not. And honestly, I think it is pretty sad that they have strayed so far away from their original use, even if it isn't needed anymore, because what does that do for the future of our breeds today?

What if something were to happen where the world went back to you need to homestead to survive? Ships may come back, and Yorkies could used to flush rats again. Has the breed stayed true enough to it's original intent to be able to do that? Also, is there always going to be a breed that steps into the place of a breed that strays too far away from it's intent? For example, down south where there are wild boars, Boxers COULD be used for hunting them. However, most people use other breeds such as that Catahoula.
__________________


Harlow 2010 Boxer :: Rider 2012 ACDx :: Tulsa 2014 ACD

http://trailingcattle.blogspot.com/
https://www.facebook.com/trailingcattle
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-07-2013, 01:52 PM
Flyinsbt's Avatar
Flyinsbt Flyinsbt is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 886
Default

My breed can't do what it was originally bred for, because it's illegal, immoral, and disgusting. So the breed has certainly changed in the years since it's been a show dog. And there are different ways of viewing that. There's the fingers-in-the-ears "no it hasn't changed! It's always been like this! La-la-la!" attitude. There's the faction (mostly in the UK) which says the modern dogs are wrong, and we need to change them back to what they were! Pronto! (although there are some massive inconsistencies in what that faction views as being "original type"). And there's the viewpoint that I am with, which is that yes, the breed has changed, and what it is now is a perfectly acceptable interpretation.

There's some variation in type, but that's based primarily on what people think they should look like. The people in the UK who favor what they view as the original type have some sporting competitions, but they can't really prove anything with those. They can have a good time with their dogs, which is the important thing, of course. There's some people in the US breeding "sporting" (primarily flyball) dogs, but those are directly from show lines, and most of those people also don't concern themselves much with health or structure, so not a huge impact there. I worry about those only in that I worry about people getting unhealthy puppies. In general, people preferring a different style of dog to mine doesn't concern me.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-07-2013, 03:32 PM
OwnedByBCs's Avatar
OwnedByBCs OwnedByBCs is offline
Will Creep For Sheep
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 588
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by meepitsmeagan View Post
I don't see any problems with diversifying a breed by having sport breeders, working breeders, ect (assuming they are health testing, blah, blah). However, I don't like the idea of a sport breeder being SO involved in sports that they have completely bred out any instinct. I don't want to see a sport bred BC or Aussie thrown in with sheep and looking like "WTF do I do with these?" I also don't want to see a working breeder be so immersed in my dog has to be a superior herder, but that dog couldn't function in the real world.

I realize a lot of breeds these days are not used for what they were originally bred for, and probably never will be. But, I think it would be nice to preserve a lot of the original intent for the breed. Could Harlow go and pin down a wild boar or a bison? I'm honestly not sure, but I'm thinking probably not. And honestly, I think it is pretty sad that they have strayed so far away from their original use, even if it isn't needed anymore, because what does that do for the future of our breeds today?

What if something were to happen where the world went back to you need to homestead to survive? Ships may come back, and Yorkies could used to flush rats again. Has the breed stayed true enough to it's original intent to be able to do that? Also, is there always going to be a breed that steps into the place of a breed that strays too far away from it's intent? For example, down south where there are wild boars, Boxers COULD be used for hunting them. However, most people use other breeds such as that Catahoula.
That happens all the time. At our BC National in 2011, 21 dogs were entered in the Herding Instinct Test, most of them show bred, but about 6 were sport bred. Extremely basic, most people who are really breeding for a herding dog won't even do it because it doesn't tell you much. Anyways, of those 21 dogs, only 11 of them passed. OF those 11, 3 were sport bred, 4 were show bred, and the rest were working bred. That tells you a lot, doesn't it? Some say that the judge was "biased" against show types, but the lady is a show GSD person. Anyways, my point is, it *really* depends on who you go to, but you absolutely can find BCs who don't have a lick of instinct, because its been entirely bred out of them. Now, don't get me wrong, there are some show breeders who do still work their dogs on sheep when they can. They don't work exactly the same, probably from the difference in structure, but they do work and their lines do maintain that instinct. Same for sporter collies.

I don't know if it is really so horrible, though, that there are these specific types. Personally, I find it exhilarating to watch a sport bred BC doing agility or flyball. Some of those show bred dogs are BEAUTIFUL, and so sweet... they actually pass for "normal" dogs. Now, I will always want dogs who can "do it all", but I know that they're most likely not going to get to the top level of agility or herding or show. To get the best of the best, you have to REALLY breed for it, and I don't really get why so many people have an issue with doing that.
__________________

www.brigadoonbordercollies.com
http://brigadoonbc.wordpress.com/

Do you want your dog to respect you because you demanded it, or because you truly earned it?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-07-2013, 04:17 PM
Psyfalcon Psyfalcon is offline
Fishies!
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,362
Default

I think there is some value in keeping breeds around and in a semi- original form. Especially when they're unique or of historical significance.

Sport can change dogs in ways other than instinct. Look at the racing sled dogs. Many sprint dogs are about half Alaskan Husky, and half Pointer. They make good racing dogs, but they don't preserve a lot of what made the original sled dogs important or even able to live in the Arctic.

At the same time, the type is being squeezed by the show group with huskies becoming shorter, Malamutes resembling wookies, and so on.

The job still exists, although its mostly pulling tourists instead of freight, but a lot of people seem to have a hard time finding moderate dogs for that sort of work, or even for camping trips or as working dogs for trappers (a few seem to exist!).

Its not that splitting into 3 groups (Pretty Dogs, Racing Dogs, and Slow Dogs) is bad, its the pull between the show and race (sport) groups that can wipe out the middle ground. You won't end up with 3 breeds, but two.
__________________
Buster
PhotoBlog
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-07-2013, 09:07 PM
Lizmo's Avatar
Lizmo Lizmo is offline
Water Junkie
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: AL
Posts: 17,300
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OwnedByBCs View Post
I mean- the working people still breed working dogs, the show people breed show dogs, the agility people breed agility dogs, etc.
These are my feelings on the subject. I absolutely believe in keeping the working origins of the breed alive. But I believe that many of the working breeders today are doing that.

Would I buy from a sport BC breeder? Probably not. I really wouldn't even touch the show side of the breed. But does it bother me that much? Not really. I'll still get a great working dog from the working breeders out there. They'll still continue to produce excellent working dogs. And those who enjoy the sport/show side of the breed will still continue to get that type of dog as well.

I used to think it was a big deal. But I've come to learn that each side will continue to produce dogs they each like. Do I like that such diversity exists for one breed name? Meh, not really. I know I've heard some talk about simply changing the name for the different sides, therefore when you say "Border Collie" you know exactly what they mean. But I don't know that it's a huge deal.
__________________

l ~Jennifer~ l
l Handler for Team Blazin' l Photographer at Joy Photography l Nikon D40X with 35mm 1.8 Nikkor Lens l
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-07-2013, 09:14 PM
Shai's Avatar
Shai Shai is offline
& the Muttly Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 6,100
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psyfalcon View Post
I think there is some value in keeping breeds around and in a semi- original form. Especially when they're unique or of historical significance.

Sport can change dogs in ways other than instinct. Look at the racing sled dogs. Many sprint dogs are about half Alaskan Husky, and half Pointer. They make good racing dogs, but they don't preserve a lot of what made the original sled dogs important or even able to live in the Arctic.

At the same time, the type is being squeezed by the show group with huskies becoming shorter, Malamutes resembling wookies, and so on.

The job still exists, although its mostly pulling tourists instead of freight, but a lot of people seem to have a hard time finding moderate dogs for that sort of work, or even for camping trips or as working dogs for trappers (a few seem to exist!).

Its not that splitting into 3 groups (Pretty Dogs, Racing Dogs, and Slow Dogs) is bad, its the pull between the show and race (sport) groups that can wipe out the middle ground. You won't end up with 3 breeds, but two.
Well but if you eliminate racing and showing what are you left with? The show people are going to go get some other breed, the racing people can't race anymore so they'll take up some other hobby, and there's still just the very tiny niche left for the slower traditional dogs.

Or you eliminate racing mixes as an option so the racing people just breed the original breeds into the type they want for showing and soon you have the sporter collie equivalent of the husky. Sure it's a purebred husky but now it's quite different from the original...is that any better?

The problem with breed preservation isn't the dogs being bred to fill new or modified niches IMO...the problem is a decrease in the dogs being bred to fill the old niche because that job is less common/disappearing.
__________________

ARCHX U-CD Kim MX MXJ NF CL3-SF RL3/2X/1X-COE CGC -- Golden Ditzhund, b. ~Mar'07
MACH ARCHX U-CD Webster MXB MJB RL3/2X/1X-COE CGC -- Flying Houdini, b. ~Jun'07
Mira CD JH MX MXB MXJ MJB CGC WCX -- Princess Cheeseface, b. Jul'09
Lodin -- Crazy Monkeybean, b. Dec'13
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-07-2013, 09:32 PM
Linds's Avatar
Linds Linds is offline
Twin 2
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 6,900
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shai View Post

The problem with breed preservation isn't the dogs being bred to fill new or modified niches IMO...the problem is a decrease in the dogs being bred to fill the old niche because that job is less common/disappearing.
This! Exactly this! You worded it perfectly.

I used to be really really opinionated about keeping the breed true to it's roots. If a sighthound couldn't hunt, if a herding breed couldn't herd etc. why would it be bred? But, as I've looked around more I've really started to wonder what the point of keeping a breed the same is other than nostalgia and the handful of people that still need/want a dog for that purpose. I see evolution of needs to be more true to the dogs history of adaption rather than letting a dog go extinct because the need isn't there.

And I know people still use BC's for herding and other breeds for their original purpose. But those people just aren't in the majority and I would rather people get the right kind of dog/breed for the sport/work/companionship that they need even if that means going in a different direction than they were originally made for.

ETA: And maybe it's just me but I think it's kinda cool the amount of variety you have to choose form in Border Collies. It sounds like it takes a lot more digging but come on! So many flavors!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-07-2013, 09:52 PM
Kilter Kilter is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 536
Default

When I was looking, it was hard to find clearances, reasonable contracts and nice dogs all in one package as far as the working lines go. Many working border collie people don't seem to think their dogs need all the testing they 'should' have, which is a shame.

Kilt is a show border, and I find her sweeter than anything else, not overly soft or shy, but just overall sweet and social, which I like and appreciate. Ticket is friendly, but he was a lot more dog as a pup, nothing bad, just more of a handful at times with different things.

I'm hoping all works out and they have a nice 'combination' litter that I can work with. I'm sure it'll be looked at funny by some, but so be it, I think they are a nice balance and something in the middle would be just perfect for me.

It would be nice if more breeders worked outside of their 'thing' but I don't see it always happening, though it is nice to have other lines to go to when you do decide to. I'd hate to see the breed split and not have the option.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-07-2013, 10:27 PM
Lizmo's Avatar
Lizmo Lizmo is offline
Water Junkie
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: AL
Posts: 17,300
Default

One thing I would like to point out - with the working side of the breed, those dogs are versatile. I do get a little flustered when people say they wished the breed was more 'combo' between the two worlds. Why does it need to be that way? If that's what *you* like, that's cool. But I get a little frustrated when they people say they need a combo to excel. I've seen many working bred BCs go on to excel greatly in the world of sports. They have brains, they have speed, they have agility to move. This is what they were bred for in working, so it carries over when you take them into the world of sports.

I'm not saying you shouldn't breed a mix of show/sport/working, and I'm not putting down anyone for how they choose to cross lines, breed whatever you'd like. There will be people who appreciate the combination of those 3 worlds. But I feel like you can get a good, solid dog who will excel out of what the breed was original bred for and sometimes it confuses me why people say you have to get a combo of sport/show/working to get a great dog.

One thing I do find interesting in all these different crosses is the difference in temperament, however.
__________________

l ~Jennifer~ l
l Handler for Team Blazin' l Photographer at Joy Photography l Nikon D40X with 35mm 1.8 Nikkor Lens l
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 07:40 AM.


1997-2013 Chazhound Dog Site