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
  #101  
Old 03-06-2014, 12:47 PM
sassafras's Avatar
sassafras sassafras is offline
such sights to show you
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 5,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miakoda View Post
However, I don't believe someone could sit and put the blame on reputable breeders for the high number of dogs with temperament and physical issues.
Who should I blame for all the CKCS with mitral valve disease and SM, then? Who should I blame for it taking some 30 years for LUA dalmatians to be AKC registration eligible? All the responsible breeders who care about healthy dogs instead of egos and arbitrary standards?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 03-06-2014, 12:50 PM
Miakoda's Avatar
Miakoda Miakoda is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,661
Default

IMO, if one wants a pet whatever, go to a responsible breeder who truly breeds to uphold the breed's standards (as closely as possible) or go the a local shelter or rescue.

Or, here's a thought.....get a different breed that actually matches all of your wants/needs with the sole exception of looks.

Say what y'all want, but I just don't get changing every thing else about a breed just to make it something you can handle all because you want the "look". I just don't.

I'm not some breed-worshipper nor some elitist that things only special people in the special crowd can own dogs. I just believe in finding a breed that fits your wants/needs, not completely changing a breed to accommodate your wants/needs just because the other ones don't have the same look.
__________________
The Hokey Pokey. That's what it's all about.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 03-06-2014, 12:59 PM
Miakoda's Avatar
Miakoda Miakoda is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,661
Default

I think we need to look at the definition of responsible breeder. Someone who prances dogs around a show ring and buys some blue ribbons, while sacrificing health aspects of the dogs (including culling pups and pretending they never existed, instead of culling the parents that produced the pups), isn't what I would consider to be responsible.

A lot of people took offense to an article I listed many years ago in regard to Catahoulas and culling by working dog owners/breeders. People gasped and hemmed and hawed, but the truth is that those guys weren't responsible for all the deaf/blind/crappy temperament ones out there today. Instead, they were demonized for their harsh standards of which they held their dogs. So now pet breeders produce all sorts of dogs, and excuses and cute little sob stories accompany all the poor quality dogs.


But....somehow I feel there's a disconnect between what some, including myself, are trying to say and what is being heard. So if I'm not being clear, I apologize.
__________________
The Hokey Pokey. That's what it's all about.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 03-06-2014, 02:44 PM
*blackrose's Avatar
*blackrose *blackrose is offline
"I'm kupo for kupo nuts!"
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 5,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miakoda View Post
I think we need to look at the definition of responsible breeder. Someone who prances dogs around a show ring and buys some blue ribbons, while sacrificing health aspects of the dogs (including culling pups and pretending they never existed, instead of culling the parents that produced the pups), isn't what I would consider to be responsible.

A lot of people took offense to an article I listed many years ago in regard to Catahoulas and culling by working dog owners/breeders. People gasped and hemmed and hawed, but the truth is that those guys weren't responsible for all the deaf/blind/crappy temperament ones out there today. Instead, they were demonized for their harsh standards of which they held their dogs. So now pet breeders produce all sorts of dogs, and excuses and cute little sob stories accompany all the poor quality dogs.


But....somehow I feel there's a disconnect between what some, including myself, are trying to say and what is being heard. So if I'm not being clear, I apologize.
I'm still on my phone so can't quote your reply to my reply, but I agree with you. Most of your replies in red had me saying, "Yes, exactly." I think it is our conclusion that is different.

For example, Am. Bullies vs APBT. That is a loaded topic in and of itself due public perception, but let's pretend it's not. (Let's also pretend that Am Bullies are actually being health tested and bred structurally sound, yes?) I honestly have no issue with the APBT breed being changed. And I have no issues with that drastic change being called a new breed name, or even a "type" name. And honestly, I wish it wasn't such a big deal *too* give a different name to something. Does that make sense?

I don't think anyone is saying people should breed their good ol' boy pet dog to their neighbor's adorable bitch. And if that is how my posts are being interpretated, I apologize for not being more clear. When I say healthy, I mean not just clinically, I mean health tested and tried. Diseases screened for and selected against. Dogs actively working and not breaking down during work. Lines researched and watched for signs of potential genetic issues that cannot be screened for. When I say structurally sound, I mean a dog that is built correctly. One that isn't going to be unable to perform normal dog behaviors (or tasks that the dog is used for) without breaking down not due to bad health, but purely because the way the dog is made. When I say sound temperament, I mean a dog with solid nerves. Regardless of whether they are reserved, or guardy, or polite, or social, or stoic, or sensitive, or prey aggressive or intolerant of stupidity...the dog should be stable.

And as much as I strongly dislike the current show trend in Labradors...who am I to say they shouldn't be bred *as long as they are being bred responsibly*? (See above explanation.) Now, whether or not they are...that is a different debate.

And yes, I do realize that from my above guide I view breeding quite a few different breeds as irresponsible...and there is a reason I wish a standard wasn't so clung to and that out crossing was more acceptable in order to make these breeds healthier. But again, that is a different debate...

ETA: And I don't view someone whose dogs has a lot of ribbons as a responsible breeder. You're dog can have titles and still be a mess. It's the whole package that counts.
__________________

Abrams, Momma's boy Chesapeake Bay Retriever and Cynder, Daddy's girl little lab muttly
~*~ DOB 4/11/13 ~*~ DOB 1/28/2006 ~*~

Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 03-06-2014, 06:54 PM
ruffiangirl ruffiangirl is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Fort McMurray, AB, CA
Posts: 1,681
Default

Maybe pet breeder is where we differed, to a reputable breeder who does health testing does conformation and working titles. Working breeders don't give a flip about the dogs conformation, ie height vs length, where their chest sits in regards to their leg, ear set, colour, coat patterns, they care that Milo does his job, does it well and will hopefully throw those attributes to some pups so he breeds him to Joes bitch because she is the same, and joe hopes the same for pups she whelps. Neither of these people are affecting the others dogs, ever.

Then you have the other people, those who have 2 unaltered dogs and just want puppies, these are the people who are ruining breeds now.

There are some breeds that I feel should not be continued as breeds, so I choose not to own them, other people like them, just not me, I see the health problems that seem rampant, or the issues that have been purposely bred into them in the name of a look, it's disgusting to me. This includes American bully's, who are as much apbt as labradoodles are poodles.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 03-06-2014, 07:48 PM
release the hounds release the hounds is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,008
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sassafras View Post
Well my whole point was kind of that I don't understand why breed standards are treated like holy everlasting texts from on high instead of some historical people's opinions (which may or may not be well-informed or ill-informed), sooooo.... not gonna be me.
and my point is "are breeds important"? So we'll go your way. No standard, throw them all together and in 50 years see what we have and start over. How do you think that will go? Everyone will be happy with a 40lb, sandy brown prick ear'd dog with limited affinity for human interaction?

Or do you think they'd quickly start selecting for traits they liked? I know my thoughts, what are your's?

and when they do start selecting for certain traits, not to develop a "breed" with a standard, but just a "type" of dog, a lap dog, a pet dog, a herding dog, a chasing stick dog, a whatever the hell I want to call it dog, dog.

When someone says they want a Lap dog, but with no lap dog traits, but want all the traits of the chasing stick dog, would you say they still want a lap dog?
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 05:49 AM.


1997-2013 Chazhound Dog Site